The relationship between Employees’ Customer Value
Anticipation Capability and Employees’ Intrinsic
Motivation.
Master Thesis
Student: Tahira Velland Student ID: 10142827
University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam Business School Faculty of Economics and Business
Date of submission: 10- Jun-2014 Supervisor: Dr. Ranjita Singh
1
Abstract
The ability to look ahead at what customers will value in the future is referred to as Customer Value Anticipation capability. In the literature, Customer Value Anticipation capability was found to be important for achieving competitive advantage, and it was also found to be a strong driver of customer satisfaction and customer loyalty. This capability should be developed at the company level, but firms also need to develop it at the individual employee level. This study focuses on the Customer Value Anticipation capability of frontline
employees. The frontline employees are those individuals in a company that are frequently in contact with the customer and in most cases they are responsible for maintaining this
relationship. This study was conducted to investigate two relationships. First, this study investigated whether intrinsic motivation has a positive effect on the Customer Value Anticipation capability of frontline employees. Secondly, it investigated whether the relationship between intrinsic motivation and Customer Value Anticipation of frontline employees is influenced by a culture of organization learning. A survey study was conducted among frontline employees of different companies and it was found that intrinsic motivation has a positive effect on customer value anticipation capability, but this relationship is not influenced by Organization Learning Culture.
2
Table of content
Abstract ... 1
1. Introduction ... 3
2. Literature review and Hypotheses development ... 6
2.1 Customer value anticipation capability ... 6
2.2 CVA capability viewed as a dynamic capability ... 14
2.3 Customer value anticipation behavior by frontline employees ... 18
2.4 Intrinsic motivation ... 20
2.5 Organization Learning Culture ... 23
3. Research method ... 29
3.1 Sample selection ... 30
3.2 Research measurements scale ... 30
3.2.1 Independent variable ... 31 3.2.2 Dependent variable ... 32 3.2.3 Moderator variable ... 32 3.2.4 Control variable ... 32 4. Results ... 34 4.1 Demographic statistics ... 35 4.2 Reliability analyses ... 36 4.3 Descriptive statistics ... 37 4.4 Hypotheses testing ... 38 5. Discussion ... 40
5.1 Limitations and directions for future research ... 41
5.2 Conclusion ... 43
3
1. Introduction
Various researchers have illustrated that managers must understand what their customers value in order to survive in competitive markets (Woodruff, 1997; Slater & Narver, 2000; Vargo & Lusch, 2004 in Flint, Blocker & Boutin, 2011). But in order to survive in the long run, managers should make an effort to find out what their customers will value in the future. Concentrating only on what customers value in the present is not enough because what
customers value changes all the time. There is empirical research that illustrates that customer value anticipation positively affects customer satisfaction and customer loyalty (for example, Flint et al., 2011). This shows the importance of anticipating future customer value.
Customers that are satisfied with the services or products delivered by their supplier are pleased and have positive emotional evaluations of the supplier (Oliver, 1980, 1997 in Flint et al., 2011). Customers that are loyal to their supplier are committed to the supplier and do not actively look for new suppliers to replace their current ones (Oliver, 1999 in Flint et al., 2011). Suppliers definitely want to keep their customers satisfied and loyal to them, so participating in activities that make the anticipation of future customer value possible becomes a necessary activity for companies.
The capability to anticipate future customer value is referred to as Customer Value
Anticipation (CVA) by Flint et al. (2011). CVA could be explained as a supplier’s ability to look ahead at what specific customers will value from supplier relationships, for example their products and service offerings (Flint et al., 2011). These products and service offerings should create benefits for the customers, because in some cases the customers have to make sacrifices (monetary and non-monetary) to acquire these products and services. Some
4
customers might even have the expectation that suppliers will anticipate their needs and desires even if they themselves cannot.
One way to discover future customer value is by being market- oriented. Market-oriented companies spend a great deal of time evaluating market trends and discussing these trends with their customers, because these trends could become valuable to their customers in the future. By remaining involved in the markets of the customers, suppliers could keep ahead of changes in customer value. Another way to discover what customers will value in the future is getting involved in the customer’s organization and obtaining first-hand information from the customer himself on what his future plans are.
The study by Flint et al. (2011) about CVA was focused at the company level, but in this study the focus will be more at the individual employee level. The relationship between the customer and the supplier company is maintained for a large part between individuals of both companies. For the supplier company this would be, for example, the sales manager, account manager or, at a higher level, the CEO. This means that in order to anticipate customers’ future values, companies should develop CVA capability at the individual employee level. The employees that are in frequent contact with customers should have the capability to obtain information from the customers and, if translated correctly, this information will help them to anticipate what the customers will value in the future. In some cases, these employees are the first in the company to collect information concerning customer value and changes in customer value. This leads to the statement that the employees that are frequently in contact with customers should at a minimum possess CVA capability. For example, sales managers are required to develop a sophisticated understanding of their customer’s business in order to
5
anticipate future needs and values, but also to assess how customer’s expectations are
evolving (Wortuba, 1996 in Flint et al., 2011). From this individual employee level, Customer Value Anticipation Capability can be transformed to the organizational level.
In this research, employees that maintain the relationship with customers are referred to as frontline employees.
To better understand the CVA capability of the individual employee, it is interesting to learn what form of motivation triggers this capability. The two forms of motivation that are
frequently mentioned in the literature are intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. These two forms are not polar opposites, but employees can be high or low on both intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. As far as is known, there is no empirical research on the relationship between employee motivation and the Customer Value Anticipation capability of the employees. This gap is significant because different tasks may require different skills and motivations, and if managers know the relationship between a particular form of motivation and CVA, they will be able to fine-tune recruitment, selection and training programs, as well as obtain insights into how to orchestrate the work environment in a way that promotes the Customer Value Anticipation capability of employees. Customer Value Anticipation involves a great amount of exploration activities and therefore following psychology theory, which has been
traditionally more concerned with intrinsic rather than extrinsic motivation, in attempts to explain behaviors such as exploration and challenge seeking (Amabile, Hill, Hennessy &Tighe, 1994), this research will concentrate on intrinsic motivation.
The research question to investigate is: under what condition does employee’s intrinsic motivation have a positive effect on CVA capability?
6
CVA capability falls within the categories of market relating capabilities, learning platform capabilities, organizational learning capabilities or knowledge creation capabilities
(Madhavaram & Hunt, 2008, in Flint et al., 2011). The assumption that CVA capability falls within different learning capabilities assumes that learning is an important element in CVA capability. Learning most probably will influence CVA capability. Assuming that there is a positive effect between employee intrinsic motivation and CVA capability, it will also be tested whether this positive effect is influenced by the learning culture of the organization.
2. Literature review and Hypotheses development
The following paragraphs discuss the main insights of the existing literature on the topics of Customer Value Anticipation, intrinsic motivation and Organization Learning Culture. First, the concept of CVA capability is explained and a perspective of CVA capability as a dynamic capability is given. Subsequently, some findings of the existing literature with regards to individual anticipation capability and intrinsic motivation are outlined. And finally, the role of Organization Learning Culture regarding the intrinsic motivation of employees and their capability to anticipate what customers will value in the future is introduced.
2.1 Customer value anticipation capability
The success of firms depends in part on the discovery and development of opportunities and the effective combination of internally and externally generated inventions (Teece, 2007). Executives these days seem to recognize that innovation is necessary but that it is more than just developing new products and services. It is about reinventing business processes and building entirely new markets that meet customer demands, which until now were not yet discovered (Teece, 2007). Constantly scanning, searching and exploring across technologies
7
and markets are requirements to identify and shape opportunities (March & Simon, 1958; Nelson & Winter, 1982 in Teece, 2007).
It is argued that being market- oriented is a source of competitive advantage (Jiménez-Jiménez & Cegarra-Navarro, 2007). Market orientation refers to “the organization-wide generation of market intelligence pertaining to current and future customer needs,
dissemination of intelligence across departments, and organization wide responsiveness to it” (Kohli & Jaworski, 1990 in Jiménez-Jiménez & Cegarra-Navarro, 2007, p. 696).
An explanation for the above argument could be that being market- oriented could result in creating important value for the customer, and suppliers that are better able than their
competitors to create value for their customers could have a competitive advantage. Important behavioral components for market orientation are: customer orientation, competitor
orientation and inter-functional coordination (Narver & Slater, 1990 in Jiménez-Jiménez & Cegarra-Navarro, 2007). Value change of customers is triggered from both inside and outside the company. The triggers from outside the customer’s company could be discovered by the supplier who is market- oriented. From outside the customer’s company, changes are triggered when their customers change (for example, customers’ desires change), competitors change (for example, new competitors or new products are introduced), suppliers change (such as alteration of a supplier’s product or a new service offering) and when changes occur in the macro environment (such as new legislation, new technology, changes in the economy) (Flint et al., 2002, in Lapierre, Tran-Khanh & Skelling, 2008).
For the suppliers, competitive advantage grows for an important part from the value they are able to create for their customers (Porter, 1985 in Blocker, Flint, Myers & Slater, 2011). The suppliers create superior customer value by consistently providing solutions to the customers’
8
articulated current needs, but also to latent and future needs (Blocker et al. 2011). In order to consistently provide solutions, the suppliers should be market- oriented, because this way they can generate and share intelligence about the customers’ needs and take coordinated action to fulfill these needs (Day 2000; Kohli & Jaworski 1990; Narver & Slater 1990 in Blocker et al. 2011). Market orientation also helps the suppliers to investigate market trends.
A small part of the literature concentrates on the anticipation of customer value (which refers to what customers will value in the future) but there is a great amount of research on the concept of customer value itself (for example, Zeithaml, 1988; Anderson, Jain & Chintagunta, 1993; Butz & Godstein, 1996; Woodruff, 1997). Some studies (for example Blocker et al. 2011) refer to CVA as proactive customer orientation. To obtain some clarity on the concept of customer value, this concept must be defined. There are different definitions for the concept of customer value, but the definition as proposed by Woodruff (1997) fits this research best. “Customer value is a customer’s perceived preference for and evaluation of those product attributes, attribute performances, and consequences arising from use that facilitate (or block) achieving the customer’s goals and purposes in use situations” (Woodruff, 1997, p.142). This definition adopts a customer perspective and mentions the focus on the customer’s goals and purposes. These goals and purposes change continuously which illustrates the importance of not only focusing on current customer value, but also on
anticipating future customer value. “Customer value anticipation refers to a supplier's ability to look ahead at what specific customers will value from supplier relationships including their product and service offerings” (Flint et al., 2011, p.219). When a firm is market-oriented, they are encouraged to act on changes in customer's needs (Flint et al., 2002; Jaworski & Kohli, 1993; Narver et al., 2004 in Flint et al., 2011). There are a number of companies that
9
have good systems in place to anticipate customers’ future needs and value. Some of these companies are Motorola, Mattel, Steelcase and Boeing (Weber et al. 2005 in Blocker et al. 2011). These companies have created innovation labs where different disciplines of the company come together to observe customers, identify problems, brainstorm about solutions and then test these solutions on their customers (Blocker et al., 2011). Research indicated that some customers expend a great deal of energy attempting to get suppliers to see and respond to their changing needs (Flint et al., 2011; Blocker et al., 2011). If suppliers are not able to respond adequately to customers’ changing needs, the customers can potentially dissolve these relationships. On the other hand, responding adequately to customers’ changing needs can serve as a major motivation for customers to build relationships with key suppliers (Flint et al., 2011). Suppliers that focus their services and products around their customers’ current and future needs could be opening up opportunities for themselves to become more involved in the customers’ world. This deeper involvement can allow suppliers to develop deeper insights to customers' organizational cultures, decision-making processes, strategies and structures that, if interpreted carefully, should enable suppliers to more effectively anticipate what customers will value next (Flint et al., 2011). Companies discover opportunities because entrepreneurs, who are individuals in the companies, can have differential access to existing information (Kirzner, 1973 in Teece, 2007). CVA and the detection of opportunities are difficult to do without close relational interaction with customers. A key process for suppliers when they want to practice CVA to identify their customers’ future and latent needs involves thoroughly analyzing the customers’ organizations and their dynamic environment. Frontline employees of the supplier company should aim at having strong personal interaction with their customers. Research has demonstrated that customers gain significant value through the social benefits they receive from the relationship with their suppliers (Gao et al. 2005;
10
Gremler & Gwinner 2000 in Blocker et al., 2011). The customer-supplier relationship provides multiple opportunities to create strong social bonds, and these strong social bonds improve the communication between the customer and the supplier. A strong social bond between supplier and customer can also lead to improved ease of doing business (Blocker et al., 2011). The importance of close relational interaction to identify what customers value is better illustrated in the customer value hierarchy model developed by Woodruff and Gardial (1996). This model is illustrated in Figure 1 below.
Figure 1: Customer Value Hierarchy Model (Woodruff, 1997, p. 142)
Desired customer value
Customer satisfaction with received value
11
The purpose of the customer value hierarchy model is to capture the essence of customer value (Woodruff, 1997). The left side of the model can be interpreted in two directions, from bottom to top and from top to bottom. The interpretation of the model depends on whether the cognitive link between the levels is bottom-up or top-down (Woodruff, 1997). The bottom-up links suggest that the desired value is a result from the customer’s learning experience as the customer rises from a lower level to a higher level in the hierarchy (Lapierre et al., 2008).
From bottom to top, the hierarchy starts with customers learning to think about products as bundles of specific attributes and attribute performances. This first level of the hierarchy consists of the desired attributes, which are the products, services or supplier characteristics that the customer values and wants to find in the offer (Woodruff & Flint, 2003 in Lapierre et al., 2008). For example, in the information and communication technology (ICT) business, the desired attributes for customers are integrated solutions, personalized solutions, a knowledgeable service provider, as well as all other characteristics the customer uses to define the desired offering (Lah et al., 2002 in Lapierre et al., 2008).
The second step in the hierarchy concerns purchasing and using products. When purchasing and using a product, the customer forms desires or preferences for certain attributes based on their ability to facilitate achieving desired consequences. This is reflected in value, in use and possession value, in the second level up in the hierarchy. Depending on whether the attribute is owned or only used, the attribute can be perceived as positive or negative. The
consequences associated with owning or using the attribute will determine their value (Lapierre et al., 2008). When a consequence produces a benefit for the customer (such as
12
productivity improvement) or minimizes a sacrifice (for example, cost reduction), the
consequence is desired(Gutman, 1982; Lindgreen & Wynstra, 2005 in Lapierre et al., 2008).
At the third level of the hierarchy, customers also learn to desire certain consequences according to their ability to help them achieve their own goals and purposes.
Thus, in short, the customer initially observes the offering as a set of attributes with certain associated performances. From there, the customer learns to form his or her desires or preferences for a certain attribute based on the consequences of owning or using the product or service. The customer also learns to desire certain consequences upon realizing that they help to achieve the goals of his or her organization (Lapierre et al., 2008).
If we look at the model from top to bottom, we see that customers use goals and purposes to attach importance to consequences (Clemons & Woodruff, 1992 in Woodruff, 1997). These consequences should be valued as instrumental in realizing the goals and purposes that are set by the customers (Lapierre et al., 2008). Depending on the desired consequences formed at that point, the customers directly identify their preferences for specific attributes and the associated performances that will produce the desired benefits (Lapierre et al., 2008).
The model also describes value received. When customers evaluate products, they use the same desired attribute, consequence and goal structure they have in mind at that time (Gardial et al., 1994; Zeithhaml, 1988 in Woodruff, 1997). Also, the use situation of the customer plays a critical role in his or her evaluation and desire. When the use situation changes, the links among the various stages in the hierarchy also change (Woodruff, 1997).
To gain more insights into the different levels of the customer value hierarchy and to react adequately when the use situation or goals and purposes of the customer change, a good
13
relationship between supplier and customer is essential. The frontline employees are the ones that have these close relational interactions with the customers and they can be the first in the company to detect possible changes in customer value and, with that, uncover new
opportunities for their companies.
The accurate detection of customers’ current and future needs is central to the marketing concept (Kohli & Jarworski, 1990 in Homburg, Wieseke & Bornemann, 2009). A supplier that follows the marketing concept must determine the current and future needs of their customers and the market in which they operate, and it must adapt itself to satisfy these needs better than its competitors. The implementation of the marketing concept is, for a large part, up to the frontline employees because of their direct customer interaction (Homburg et al., 2009). In most companies, the frontline employees are in close contact with different customers. Because customers differ in their goals, strategies and needs, it has become increasingly important for frontline employees to successfully recognize and address the needs of each specific customer. In order to implement the marketing concept, frontline employees must be able to form accurate perceptions of an individual customer’s hierarchy of needs (Homburg et al., 2009). When a frontline employee is interacting with customers with the purpose of achieving a particular goal, this is called the pragmatic approach to accuracy (Gill & Swann, 2004; Swann, 1984 in Homburg et al., 2009). The goal will determine which information the frontline employee will seek during this interaction. Goals are generally divided into accuracy goals and speed goals (Fiske, 1992 in Homburg et al., 2009). When a frontline employee sets an accuracy goal, he or she tries to gather accurate information about the customer along dimensions that are relevant to the respective interaction goal (Fiske & Taylor, 1991; Hilton & Darley, 1991 in Homburg et al., 2009). But when the frontline
14
employee sets a speed goal, the information he or she gathers is rather simple and focused on immediate goal attainment (such as, seeking closure or selling a product), (Fiske, 1992; Hilton & Darley, 1991 in Homburg et al., 2009). In the case of CVA, the frontline employee needs to set an accurate goal, which is trying to discover the customer’s future needs and then,
accordingly, acquiring accurate knowledge from the customer regarding these future needs. If we want to investigate the customer value anticipation capability of frontline employees, we can follow Flint et al. (2011) and say that the customer value anticipation capability of an employee refers to that employee’s ability to look ahead at what specific customers will value from supplier relationships, including their product and service offerings.
2.2 CVA capability viewed as a dynamic capability
According to Flint et al. (2011), CVA capability can be seen as a dynamic capability. The explanation for this is as follow: The dynamic capability theory is an extension of the
resource-based view. And following the conceptualization of operant resources by Constantin and Lusch (1994, in Madhavaram & Hunt, 2008), dynamic capabilities can be viewed as an operant resource. Operant resources are those resources that act on other resources, and they
are mostly “human (e.g., the skills and knowledge of individual employees), organizational
(e.g., controls, routines, cultures, competences), informational (e.g., knowledge about market segments, competitors, and technology), and relational (e.g., relationships with competitors, suppliers, and customers)” (Hunt, 2004 in Madhavaram & Hunt, 2008 p. 67).
As an operant resource, CVA aligns with resources such as informational resources, human resources and organizational resources. Because close relational interaction with customers is needed for CVA, it is most likely a higher order operant resource. And if CVA is considered an interconnected operant resource, it would fall within the categories of market relating
15
capabilities, learning platform capabilities, organizational learning capabilities or knowledge creation capabilities (see Table 3, Madhavaram & Hunt, 2008 in Flint et al., 2011). CVA could also be categorized as a composite operant resource, and then it would fall within the categories of market knowledge competence, absorptive capacity, customer response
capabilities or knowledge management capabilities (see Table 2, Madhavaram & Hunt, 2008 in Flint et al., 2011).
Because of the dynamic nature of CVA (the concept that what customers need and value changes all the time and suppliers should react to these changes), and because according to Teece (2007) dynamic capabilities can be divided into the capacity to sense, shape and seize opportunities (CVA can help to sense opportunities), dynamic capability literature will be incorporated into this research.
The dynamic capabilities of a company are the organizational and strategic routines by which managers change their resource base (Eisenhardt & Martin, 2000). The changes involve acquiring and shedding resources, integrating different resources together and recombining them to generate new value-creating strategies (Grant, 1996; Pisano, 1994 in Eisenhardt & Martin, 2000).
Suppliers use techniques to anticipate customer value and these techniques require ample resource commitments (such as human resources and financial resources). Examples of these techniques are scenario planning and structured customer visits programs (Blocker et al., 2011). And when frontline employees recognize opportunities and they communicate them to their managers, the managers must figure out different aspects such as which technologies to pursue and which market segments to target (Teece, 2007).
16
A large part of the research about dynamic capabilities is focused on the organizational level (Teece, Pisano & Shuen, 1997; Eisenhardt & Martin, 2000; King & Tucci, 2002; Teece, 2007). Rothaermel and Hess (2007) state that dynamic capabilities do exist at the individual employee level. Their conclusion is based on suggestions made by Eisenhardt and Martin (2000) and Zollo and & Winter (2002). CVA capability is a dynamic capability that starts at the individual level. Helfat and Peteraf (2003) have researched the Capability Lifecycle (CLC), which describes a general pattern and set of possible paths that characterize the evolution of an organizational capability. The CLC can be incorporated into any type of capability and any type of organizational setting, and it includes several stages. The first stage is the founding stage. The founding stage starts with a group or team, consisting of
individuals that all possess human capital (knowledge, skills and experience). In this stage, the group of individuals organizes around an objective requiring the creation of a capability. From the founding stage, the capability develops to other stages, and in the maturity stage, the capability becomes more deeply embedded in the company structure. CVA capability of the frontline employee falls into this founding stage.
Very important for dynamic capabilities and thus also for CVA is decentralization in
companies. According to Teece et al. (1997), decentralized organizations are less likely to be blindsided by market and technological developments, and as a result of that, they will be more likely to detect opportunities that are also visible to others. When companies have a centralized structure, strategic decisions made by the management tend to become isolated from marketplace realities (Teece, 2007). Decentralization must be favored to sustain dynamic capabilities, because it brings top management closer to new technologies, customers and to the market (Teece, 2007). Since in the case of decentralization, different
17
managers observe and receive different information and they control different decisions that they do not have to communicate to a central decision-maker, decentralization enhances flexibility in decision-making and the responsiveness to opportunities (Teece, 2007).
Another benefit of anticipating what customers will value is that it provides lead-time for suppliers to actually prepare a response and to be ready when changes emerge (Flint et al., 2011). Just as companies are trying to discover opportunities, the chances are great that their competitors are doing the same. The competitors may approach the opportunity differently and this may change the nature of the opportunity (Teece, 2007). Eisenhardt and Martin (2000) implied that there are commonalities across companies when we look at the effective dynamic capabilities. Dynamic capabilities can be imitated, are mobile and can be substituted. Thus, if we look at Customer Value Anticipation capability, different companies will possess this capability, but the manner of development could be different. Early recognition of an opportunity could give a company a competitive advantage over their competitors. Realizing the opportunity before the competitor gives the company lead-time to study this opportunity and react before the competitor even recognizes it. With the knowledge that there are commonalities across companies with respect to dynamic capabilities and that dynamic capabilities can be imitated, are mobile and can be substituted, the real long-term competitive advantage of the dynamic capabilities lies in “using dynamic capabilities sooner, more
astutely, or more fortuitously than the competition to create resource configurations that have that advantage” (Eisenhardt & Martin 2000, p.1117). A good example of using dynamic capabilities to gain long-term competitive advantage can be found in the case of GE.
“The acquisition capability of GE Capital is well known, and competitors can readily copy it or independently develop it themselves. But what is far more difficult to duplicate is the
18
resource base of already acquired companies and the related synergies among them that GE Capital has achieved and continues to build. This advantage is particularly enhanced when the related resource configurations are combinations of tightly woven, synergistic activities (Collis & Montgomery, 1995; Milgrom & Roberts, 1990; Porter, 1996; Prahalad & Hamel, 1990)” (Eisenhardt & Martin, 2000, p.1117).
In the case of CVA capability, the advantage could lie in finding the synergies in the various future value desires of the different customers, and in creating resource configurations that would create the most value for the customer. Although in most supplier companies strategic planning and product development activities are not part of the task of frontline employees, with the correct guidelines, they can look for the synergetic clues of future customer value. If CVA capability is embedded deeper in the company, the synergies can be identified from the information that was collected by the frontline employees.
2.3 Customer value anticipation behavior by frontline employees
In the literature, anticipatory behavior is sometimes described as related to proactive behavior (for example, Grant & Ashford, 2008). Grant and Ashford (2008) defined proactive behavior as “anticipatory action that employees take to impact themselves and/or their environments” (p.8). Anticipatory behavior is a particular form of motivated behavior of an employee at work (Grant & Ashford, 2008). When employees take anticipatory actions to impact their environment, they are future-focused and they are acting in advance (Grant & Ashford, 2008). Thus, when an employee has CVA capability, he or she proactively seeks information on what customers will value in the future. The existing research on proactive or anticipatory behavior provides a large amount of evidence of how employees express anticipatory (proactive) behavior. Mostly, this anticipatory behavior is in their own organization. But in
19
the case of CVA, this anticipatory behavior is towards their customers, and specifically towards what the customer will value in the future. Employees express CVA behavior, for example, by seeking feedback (Ashford, Blatt, & Van de Walle, 2003; Ashford & Cummings, 1983, 1985 in Grant & Ashford, 2008) from customers. This feedback could give information about whether the delivered products or services still meet the value creation expectations of the customer or whether they will meet the customer’s future value creation expectations. Other examples for expressing CVA behavior are:
Taking the initiative in pursuing the goals of the customer (Frese & Fay, 2001; Roberson, 1990 in Grant & Ashford, 2008);
Actively adapting to new environments of the customer (Ashford & Black, 1996; Kim,
Cable & Kim, 2005; Saks & Ashforth, 1996; Wanberg & Kammeyer-Mueller, 2000 in Grant & Ashford, 2008);
Acting in advance to influence individuals in their own organization and in the
customer’s organization (Kipnis & Schmidt, 1988; Williams, Gray & von Broembsen, 1976 in Grant & Ashford, 2008);
Selling issues of the customer in their own organization (Dutton & Ashford, 1993 in Grant & Ashford, 2008);
Building social networks with the customer (Morrison, 2002; Ostroff & Kozlowski, 1992 in Grant & Ashford, 2008); and
Implementing ideas and solving problems for the customer (Parker, Williams & Turner, 2006 in Grant & Ashford, 2008).
When employees have CVA capability, they are thinking, deliberating, planning and acting on events that have not yet occurred. They anticipate and envision future customer value and
20
choose and adjust situations in order to create that future customer value. When expressing anticipatory behavior, employees are not only future-oriented, they are also change-oriented (Bateman & Crant, 1993; Crant, 2000 in Grant & Ashford, 2008); they want to make a difference for the customer. When anticipating customer value, this process not only involves envisioning the goal, which is a “customer’s future value”, it also involves imagining the benefits and costs of pursuing or even not pursuing that goal (Grant & Ashford, 2008). Imagination in CVA serves two critical functions (Kosslyn, 1987 in Grant & Ashford, 2008). First, it serves as a navigation and tracking tool: it makes it possible for employees to envision how the customer’s value will change. Secondly, it makes it possible for employees to
understand and process information. The explanation given by Grant and Ashford (2008) for these two functions for imagination is that when imagining a scenario, people assume for a period of time that the scenario is accurate and they construct a plausible version of it unfolding. This causes emotional reactions and stimulates problem solving (Taylor et al., 1998 in Grant & Ashford, 2008). For example, an employee may imagine something that will be of value for the customer in the future. The employee can then use this vision to
recommend changes in the products and/or services that the company provides to the customer.
2.4 Intrinsic motivation
Some people are driven by a passionate interest in their work. They have a deep level of enjoyment and involvement in their work (Amabile et al., 1994). When the “labor of love aspect” is driving human behavior, psychologists refer to that as intrinsic motivation (Amabile et al., 1994). When intrinsically motivated, people are involved in their work primarily because the work itself is interesting, engaging or in some way satisfying (Amabile
21
et al., 1994). Another form of motivation is extrinsic motivation. Extrinsically motivated people work primarily in response to something apart from the work itself, for example a reward or recognition (Amabile et al., 1994). In attempts to explain behaviors such as exploration, creativity and the search for challenges, psychological theory has traditionally been more concerned with intrinsic rather than extrinsic motivation (Amabile et al., 1994). Exploration, challenge-seeking activity and creativity are all behaviors that are important in anticipating customer value. Following psychology theory, this research is focused on intrinsic motivation and not on extrinsic motivation.
Intrinsically motivated people need the ability to exert control over their job (Ryan & Deci, 2000 in Ohly & Fritz, 2010), which could make additional engagement at work more likely (Hackman & Oldham, 1976 in Ohly & Fritz, 2010) and may result in increased anticipatory behavior. Every job requires some level of creativity (Shalley, Gilson & Blum, 2000;
Unsworth, 2001 in Prabhu, Sutton & Sauser, 2008). “Creativity is the gift and discipline that provides the competitive edge in marketing, production, finance, and all of the other aspects in an organization” (Anderson, 1992 in Prabhu et al., 2008, p.53). Anderson’s statement shows the importance of creativity for various aspects of a job in an organization. Thus, when employees are imagining a scenario about future customer value, the creativity of these employees becomes very important in creating ideas for these future values. Employees may have certain traits and abilities that are favorable to creativity, but the intrinsic motivation of the employee will be decisive in whether these traits and abilities will result in achieving creative results (Amabile, 1983 in Prabhu et al., 2008).
Employee creativity is the development of ideas about products and/or services that are novel and potentially useful to an organization (Oldham & Cummings, 1996; Shalley, Zhou &
22
Oldham, 2004 in Coelho, Augusto & Lages, 2011). The development of these useful and novel services and products can be the result of a recognized current or future need of
customers, which goes back to the concept of Customer Value Anticipation. An idea is useful when it provides direct or indirect value to an organization in the short or long term (Shalley et al., 2004, in Coelho et al., 2011). Employee creativity concerns the development of ideas at the individual level (Woodman, Sawyer & Griffin, 1993, in Coelho et al., 2010) and is the first step in the organizational innovation process (Shalley et al., 2004; West & Farr, 1990 in Coelho et al., 2011). Research indicates that a supportive work environment helps employees feel interested in and excited about the content of their work, and this excitement translates into increased creativity (Oldham & Cummings, 1996; Shalley et al., 2004 in Coelho et al., 2011). The basis for this argument is Cognitive Evaluation Theory, which states that
contextual factors have different roles, for example, informational roles (Deci & Ryan, 1985 in Coelho et al., 2011). Contextual factors are dimensions of the work environment that potentially influence employee creativity but that are not part of the individual (Shalley et al., 2004 in Coelho et al., 2011). Individuals perceive informational roles of contextual factors as supporting autonomy and promoting competence (Deci & Ryan, 1985 in Coelho et al., 2011). When informational roles dominate, employees perceive little pressure to accomplish tasks in externally determined ways, developing a sense of an internal locus of control, which
promotes their intrinsic motivation (Coelho et al., 2011). An employee has to be inherently interested in an issue or task in order to be creative when performing the task or finding a solution for an issue (Steiner, 1965 in Prabhu et al., 2008). Intrinsically motivated employees are more likely to search for new pathways to perform a task or to solve a problem and consequently will be more excited about their work, which increases their creativity (Shalley et al., 2004 in Coelho et al., 2011). An important source of creativity is an employee’s
23
intrinsic interest in a task, which leads to voluntary exploration of new ideas (Rogers, 1954 in Prabhu et al., 2008). Different researchers have studied the relationship between intrinsic motivation and creativity (for example, Amabile et al., 1994; Coelho et al., 2011). The results of these studies are that intrinsic motivation positively relates to employee creativity. Because creativity is an important part of the concept of customer value anticipation, the following hypothesis is proposed:
H1: Intrinsic motivation positively relates to an employee’s customer value anticipation capability.
2.5 Organization Learning Culture
Organizations with a learning culture stimulate their employees to continually expand their capacity to create the results they desire, nurture new and expansive patterns of thinking, set free collective aspiration, and see the company as a whole (Senge, 1990 in Jiménez-Jiménez & Cegarra-Navarro, 2007). These activities become part of the role that employees assume within the company. If these roles are not made clear to the employees, it could lead to role ambiguity. According to Coelho et al. (2011), employees that are experiencing role ambiguity are not certain of the activities they need to perform and have a poor picture of how their tasks relate to other jobs and to people inside and outside the organization. This makes it difficult for employees to fully utilize their expertise and it negatively impacts their creativity (Coelho et al., 2011) which could ultimately negatively impact their CVA capability. This ambiguity could be the result of supervisory miscommunication, poor training, and/or lack of a clear role definition by management (Mattson & Dubinsky 1979 in Coelho et al., 2011). By providing prompt performance feedback and focusing on the development of employees’ skills and abilities, supervisors enable and motivate employees to learn new ways of performing tasks
24
and improve their competences. The increased competences should lead employees to address the needs of customers in more creative ways. More important than performance feedback is cognitive feedback. Cognitive feedback provides information on how and why a desired outcome is achieved or not achieved (Weitz, Sujan & Sujan, 1986). Cognitive feedback could increase the intrinsic motivation of frontline employees by focusing attention on the content of the job.
For organizational learning, it is very important to create and control external and internal knowledge for both current and future business activities. By being market-oriented, companies could obtain strong norms that need to be set for learning from customers and competitors, but it could also foster intelligence generation and dissemination (Jiménez-Jiménez & Cegarra-Navarro, 2007). At a minimum, companies should have the same
knowledge base as their competitors but, to gain competitive advantage, their knowledge base should be larger. This means that companies should invest in market research, analyze
changes in the business environment and get feedback from customers about the products and services they provide. The information received from market research, customer feedback and analysis results should be communicated to the rest of the company, to create awareness for all employees (Jiménez-Jiménez & Cegarra-Navarro, 2007).
As a means of customer retention, customer relationship building and customer value
anticipation take on a primary role in supplier-customer relationships; customer learning and translation processes become a core competency issue. Competing on superior value delivery forces organizations to compete on superior customer value learning and translation
capabilities (Burns & Woodruff, 1992; Day, 1994; Slater & Narver, 1995 in Woodruff, 1997). This means that organizations need to focus on the knowledge and learning process of
25
employees. The competency of employees to anticipate what customers will value in the future is a competency that could be learned overtime. Employees who are experts in an area can anticipate future actions and outcomes better than non-experts by picking up on subtle clues faster and by more accurately connecting them to possible outcomes (Smeeton,
Williams, Hodges & Ward, 2005 in Flint et al., 2011). This suggests that an anticipation skill can be developed or learned and, in the case of CVA, it depends on the more thorough study of details associated with what customers will value in the future.
Anticipating the future value of a customer could result in detecting an opportunity for the supplier company. But recognizing opportunities requires specific knowledge, creative activity, and the ability to understand the customer’s decision-making process and practical wisdom (Nonaka & Toyama, 2007 in Teece, 2007). One way companies can obtain
information about their customers’ decision-making processes and their practical wisdom is, for example, by training their frontline employees to become skilled interviewers and
observers so that they can obtain real-time data on what customers value now and on what they will value in the future. The customer value hierarchy model (Woodruff & Gardial, 1996), which was described earlier, helps with highlighting the areas on which frontline employees should focus when trying to gain more insights into current and future customer value. The areas to focus on are the desired products and attribute performances, the desired consequences in the use situations, and the customers’ goals and purposes.
The ability to recognize opportunities depends in part on the employee’s capabilities and existing knowledge, or on the knowledge and learning capacities of the company to which the employee belongs (Teece, 2007). In order for learning to occur and benefit the entire
26
to respond to changes in the internal and external environment of the company (Argyris & Schon, 1978 in Jiménez-Jiménez & Cegarra-Navarro, 2007), and they have to acquire knowledge that they recognize as potentially useful to their organization (Huber, 1991 in Jiménez-Jiménez & Cegarra-Navarro, 2007). It is necessary that knowledge acquired by an individual employee be transferred to the rest of the organization, so that it can be used by other individuals in the organization (Sinkula, 1994 in Jiménez-Jiménez & Cegarra-Navarro, 2007). In the organizational learning literature, there are four primary constructs that are referred to regarding the concept of organizational learning. These constructs are: information acquisition, distribution, interpretation and memory (Jiménez-Jiménez & Cegarra-Navarro, 2007). Knowledge acquisition is an activity in which any employee in the company can participate. It requires constant effort and experimentation from all employees (Jiménez-Jiménez & Cegarra-Navarro, 2007). After an individual employee has acquired knowledge, the company must stimulate the distribution of this knowledge to the rest of the company. On an individual level, this distribution can take place through conversations and interactions among employees (Brown & Duguid, 1991; Koffman & Senge, 1993 in Jiménez-Jiménez & Cegarra-Navarro, 2007). But this acquired and distributed information is not of much value to the organization if it is not interpreted correctly. The next step is thus the correct
interpretation of the distributed knowledge. The interpretation process contains the following components: knowledge translation, development of models of understanding, extraction of meaning, and the creation of conceptual schemes among key managers (Daft & Weick, 1984 in Jiménez-Jiménez & Cegarra-Navarro, 2007). The last construct is memory.
Organizational memory refers to the collective knowledge of organizations (Jiménez-Jiménez & Cegarra-Navarro, 2007). It contains, for example, the theories that are in use, information databases, and procedures and routines (Jiménez-Jiménez & Cegarra-Navarro, 2007).
27
Earlier in this research report it has been written that CVA capability can be seen as a
dynamic capability. Continuing with this concept, this research will follow Zollo and Winter (2002), who stated that learning mechanisms shape the evolution of dynamic capabilities. Experience accumulation, knowledge articulation and knowledge codification are referred to as the learning mechanism of the firm by Zollo and Winter (2002). “A dynamic capability is a learned and stable pattern of collective activity through which the organization systematically generates and modifies its operating routines in pursuit of improved effectiveness” (Zollo & Winter, 2002, p. 340). This definition of dynamic capabilities illustrates the importance of learning within companies with regards to dynamic capabilities and therefore fits this research very well. The learning process through which the organization systematically generates and modifies its operating routines is extremely important in the case of CVA capability. When frontline employees approach customers with the purpose of obtaining information that can help them or their organization better anticipate customer value, the routine followed should be systematic, according to Woodruff and Gardial’s (1996) customer value hierarchy. The routine can be learned by performing it or by receiving training from more experienced colleagues in this area, for example. Due to the different types of customers, it should also be modified when needed.
CVA capability, approached as a dynamic capability, is shaped by the evolution of the learning mechanisms: experience accumulation, knowledge articulation and knowledge codification (Zollo & Winter, 2002). Experience accumulation refers to the fact that learning is achieved through a series of learning experiences in the company. In the case of CVA capability, the more an employee engages in activities that help to obtain more insights into customer value, the better he or she will become at anticipating what customers value. On the other hand, learning for the company as a whole is also being achieved when multiple
28
employees engage in CVA activities and share their experiences and knowledge with the other employees.
The next learning mechanism – knowledge articulation – refers to implicit knowledge that is articulated in group discussions, debriefing sessions and performance evaluation sessions. By employees sharing their individual experiences and comparing their opinions with their colleagues, they can achieve an improved understanding of the causal mechanisms intervening between the actions required to execute a certain task and the performance outcomes produced.
Knowledge codification is when individuals compile their understanding of the performance implications of internal routines in, for example, manuals or standard operational procedures.
Continued learning opportunities for individuals are recommended, but it is not sufficient to merely influence changes in the knowledge performance of the company. Learning must be embedded in systems, practices and structures with the intention to share and regularly use within the organization, so that the knowledge performance can improve (Marsick & Watkins, 2003). Companies can choose structured training, but a lot of valuable learning takes place on the job, in groups, or through conversations (Huber, 2002 in Marsick & Watkins, 2003). Taking all of the above into consideration, it would be fair to conclude that organizations have to strive for a learning culture in order to improve CVA capability.
The first hypothesis states that intrinsic motivation positively relates to an employee’s customer value anticipation capability. The fact that learning and exploring are so important to intrinsically motivated people leads to the prediction of a moderating role for the
29
H2: The relationship between intrinsic motivation and employee CVA capability is
influenced by the Organization Learning Culture, such that the relationship will be stronger. The conceptual model of this research is illustrated in Figure 2.
Figure 2: Conceptual model
3. Research method
According to Saunders et al. (2009), a good approach for an explanatory study is the use of standardized questionnaires. The questionnaire used for this research is a self-administered online questionnaire, which was distributed by emailing the internet link to the respondents. The questionnaire contains constructs that were used in previous empirical research. Some constructs were altered to better fit this research. Before distributing the questionnaire to the actual respondent, it was tested on 15 co-workers who are all frontline employees (Saunders
30
et al., 2009). The questionnaire started with a section that explained the purpose of the research and highlighted the anonymity of the questionnaire.
3.1 Sample selection
The sample that was aimed for in this study contains a wide range of companies in the Netherlands that are in the supplier role of the supplier-customer relationship. Since the purpose was to obtain a more in-depth understanding of the relationship between a personal motivation characteristic and a competency, the focus was not on one particular industry, company or job function. Pooling people with different occupations contributes to the ability to generalize the findings (Coelho et al., 2011). The only mandatory requirement for the respondents was that they should be employed as a frontline employee in a firm that is the supplier in the supplier-customer relationship. By frontline employee, it was meant that the employee is frequently in contact with the customer and is responsible for the relationship between his or her company and the customer. To narrow down the sample, the questionnaire focused on sales managers, customer support managers and account managers. The
respondents were of different hierarchical levels. In order to distribute the questionnaire to a large group of respondents, snowball sampling was selected. Every person contacted was asked to forward the questionnaire to people in their network who fit the above description of a frontline employee and was employed as a sales manager, customer support manager or account manager. Further, they were requested to report the total number of people to whom they had forwarded the questionnaire.
3.2 Research measurements scale
31
H1: Intrinsic motivation positively relates to an employee’s customer value anticipation capability.
H2: The relationship between intrinsic motivation and employee CVA capability is
influenced by the Organization Learning Culture, such that the relationship will be stronger.
The scale items for the independent, dependent and moderator variables are described in Table 1.
3.2.1 Independent variable
The independent variable in this research is employee intrinsic motivation (IM). For this variable, the measurement scale developed by Amabile et al. (1994) is used. Traditionally, intrinsic motivation was studied from a social psychological perspective, but there are
theoretical statements that suggest that intrinsic motivation may also exist as relatively stable individual differences (Amabile et al., 1994). The self-perception theory by Bem (1967) proposes that when internal states are weak, ambiguous or not interpretable, individuals must look to their own behavior and situation in which it occurs to interpret their attitudes and motivations (Amabile et al., 1994). The measurement developed by Amabile et al. (1994) is one that can be used by individuals to evaluate their motivations. The intrinsic motivation measurement includes self-determination, competence, task involvement, curiosity and
interest elements. The measurement contains 15 items that are measured on a five-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree and 5 = strongly agree). The original measurement used a four-point Likert scale, from 1 = never or almost never true of me, to 4 = always or almost always true of me. To avoid confusion for respondents, the decision was made to measure all
32
3.2.2 Dependent variable
The dependent variable is Customer Value Anticipation capability (CVA cap). For this variable, the measurement scale of Flint et al. (2011) is used. This measurement contains 10 items that will be measured on a five-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree and 5 = strongly agree). In the Flint et al. (2011) paper, these items were designed for customers. For the purpose of this study, they are transformed to a style that is applicable to the employees of the supplier company.
3.2.3 Moderator variable
The Organization Learning Culture (OLC) is measured using the Dimensions of the Learning Organization Questionnaire (DLOQ). Marsick and Watkins (2003) developed this
questionnaire for the learning organization. This questionnaire originally had 43 items, but the shorter Yang (2003) version is used for this research. This measurement contains seven items that are measured on a five-point Likert scale (1 = never and 5 = always).
3.2.4 Control variable
This study controls for the respondents’ personal characteristics and background, such as gender, age, number of years employed and hierarchical level in the organization. Data on the control variables is collected through the same questionnaire as used to collect data on the other variables. The reason gender is included as a control variable is because previous studies have indicated that men and women differ in their intrinsic motivation ( Amabile et al., 1994). The same study also indicated that there is a relationship between intrinsic motivation and number of years of experience in their occupation (in this study, this is referred to as ‘years employed’), and the study also indicated that there might be a relationship between age and motivation.
33
The factor of hierarchical level was controlled since the respondents are of different
hierarchical levels. Managers, for example, obtain information from various sources. They get information from various team members. They are in contact with customers on a different level, mostly on the management level and not so much on the operational level. This could influence their CVA capability.
The factors ‘age’ and ‘years employed’ are measured using an open question. Gender is measured using a direct question with two options. Hierarchical level is also measured using a direct question with four options: employee, lower management, middle management and higher management. For all of the scale items, please refer to Table 1.
Table 1: scale items
Scale Item
Intrinsic motivation
IM 1 I enjoy tackling problems that are completely new to me
IM 2 I enjoy trying to solve complex problems
IM 3 The more difficult the problem, the more I enjoy trying to solve it.
IM 4 I want my work to provide me with opportunities for increasing
my knowledge and skills
IM 5 Curiosity is the driving force behind much of what I do
IM 6 I want to find out how good I really can be at my work
IM 7 I prefer to figure things out for myself
IM 8 What matters most to me is enjoying what I do
IM 9 It is important for me to have an outlet for self expression
IM 10 I prefer work I know I can do well over work that stretches my
abilities (reversed scored)
IM 11 No matter what the outcome of a project, I am satisfied if I feel I
gained a new experience
IM 12 I am more comfortable when I can set my own goals
IM 13 I enjoy doing work that is so absorbing that I forget about
everything else
IM 14 It is important for me to be able to do what I most enjoy
34
4. Results
The results of this research are reported in the following sections. First, the demographic statistics of the participants are reported. Secondly, the results of the reliability analysis for the variables that are measured with multiple items are reported. The Cronbach’s alpha coefficient is analyzed for the dependent variable Customer Value Anticipation (CVA) Customer Value
Anticipation cap
CVA cap 1 I excel at anticipating changes in what the customer needs before
the customer even asks
CVA cap 2 I am one step ahead of our competitors in predicting the customer
needs
CVA cap 3 I plan well ahead of time to anticipate on changes in what the
customer wants from us
CVA cap 4 I see things coming down the road before other suppliers do
CVA cap 5 I am able to understand and predict the customers changing needs
CVA cap 6 I spend time studying changes in our customers’ business
environment so that I can exercise better foresight about their future needs
CVA cap 7 I present new solutions to our customers that they actually need but
did not think to ask about
CVA cap 8 I am always looking for clues that might reveal changes in what
the customers value beyond what they currently ask from us
CVA cap 9 I regularly attempt to modify our products and services in line with
the customers changing needs
CVA cap 10 I have learned how to pick up clues to changes in what the
customers want from us Organization Learning
Culture
OLC 1 In my organization, people are rewarded for learning
OLC 2 In my organization, people spend time building trust with each
other
OLC 3 In my organization, teams/groups revise their thinking as a result
of group discussions or information collected
OLC 4 My organization makes its lessons learned available to all
employees
OLC 5 My organization recognizes people for taking initiative
OLC 6 My organization works together with the outside community to
meet mutual needs
OLC 7 In my organization, leaders continually look for opportunities to
35
capability, as well as for the independent variable Intrinsic Motivation (IM) and the moderating variable Organization Learning Culture (OLC). Next, a correlation analysis is carried out and the correlations are reported. Finally, the interaction between the independent variable and the moderating variable is tested, using Process in SPSS (Andrew F. Hayes). There are no missing values in the completed questionnaires.
4.1 Demographic statistics
For this study, the questionnaire was distributed to 108 respondents, resulting in 61 completed questionnaires. This represents a 56% response rate. Of the participants, 72.1% were male and 27.9% of the participants were female (Table 2). The age range of the participants was
between 20 years and 61 years (Table 3). The amount of work experience of the respondents varied between 1 year and 36 years (Table 4). The respondents’ hierarchical level varied between employee and high management (Table 5).
Table 2: Results of gender statistics
Frequency Percent
Male 44 72.1
Female 17 27.9
Table 3: Age statistics
Frequency Percentage
Between 20 years and 30 years 20 32.8
Between 30 years and 40 years 20 32.7
Between 40 years and 50 years 12 19.7
36
Table 4: Total years of work experience
Frequency Percent
5 years or less 23 37.7
Between 6 years and 11 years 14 23.0
Between 11 years and 16 years 6 9.8
Between 16 years and 21 years 4 6.6
Between 21 years and 26 years 2 3.3
Between 26 years and 31 years 8 13.1
31 years and more 4 6.6
Table 5: Hierarchical level
Frequency Percent Employee 32 52.5 Lower management 11 18.0 Middle management 10 16.4 Higher management 8 13.1 4.2 Reliability analyses
For the purpose of this research, one dependent variable, one moderator variable, one independent variable and four control variables were measured.
The dependent variable CVA capability was captured using ten questions. The Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was 0.760. This is greater than 0.7, which indicates that the variable had good internal reliability.
The independent variable Intrinsic Motivation was captured using fifteen questions. This variable contained two questions that were reverse-coded. Before measuring the Cronbach’s
37
alpha coefficient for the Intrinsic Motivation measurement, these two questions were first reversed to the same code as the other questions. The Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was 0.695. The moderator variable Organization Learning Culture was captured using seven questions. The Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was 0.852. In conclusion, all multi-item variables had good internal reliability.
4.3 Descriptive statistics
Means, standard deviations and inter correlations among the variables are presented in Table 6. The dependent, independent and moderator variables were mean-centered prior to analysis. The significant correlations have been marked with an asterix (*).
Table 6: Correlation table
Mean Std. Dev. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Gender (1) 1.28 0.452
Age (2) 36 10.381 -0.284*
Years work exp (3) 12 10.514 -0.336** 0.916**
Hierarchical level (4) 1.90 1.106 -0.311* 0.332** 0.367**
CVAcap (5) 3.680 0.460 -0.101 0.039 0,098 0.327*
IM (6) 3.778 0.381 -0.022 -0.220 -0,152 0.063 0.335**
OLC (7) 3.271 0.687 -0.025 -0.322* -0.345** 0.058 0.183 0.280** *. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level
(2 - Tailed).
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2- Tailed).
38
Table 7: Outcome of moderation SPSS Process
Coeff Se t P LLCI ULCI
Constant 3.4917 0.2177 16.0374 0.000 3.0550 3.9284 OLC 0.1260 0.1244 1.0125 0.3159 -0.1236 0.3756 IM 0.3259 0.2224 1.4654 0.1487 -0.1202 0.7720 Int_1 -.1956 0.2829 -0.6916 0.4922 -0.7630 0.3717 Gender 0.0310 0.1352 0.2294 0.8195 -0.2401 0.3021 Age -0.0169 0.0160 -1.0542 0.2966 -0.0490 0.0152 Years empl 0.0204 0.0183 1.1148 0.2700 -0.0163 0.0570 Hier level 0.1080 0.0521 2.0723 0.0431 0.0035 0.2124 4.4 Hypotheses testing
Table 6 shows the correlations for the variables used in this research. The correlation between intrinsic motivationand employee Customer Value Anticipation capability is the statistical test for Hypothesis 1. The result of this correlation is 0.335 with a p-value of 0.008. The correlation is weak, but we can conclude that Hypothesis 1 is supported. This means that intrinsic motivation relates positively to CVA capability.
To test Hypothesis 2, the interaction between intrinsic motivation(independent variable) and Organization Learning Culture (moderator variable) was tested using Process in SPSS. To test this moderation relationship, Model 1 of Process was used. Process in SPSS provides results in multiple steps. The most important step for the determination of Hypotheses 2 is the result of the interaction between the independent variable (IM) and the moderator variable (OLC). The results of this test indicate that Hypotheses 2 is not supported (coefficient = -0.1956; SE = 0.2829; P = 0.4922). The interaction is not significant. This means that the
relationship between intrinsic motivationand CVA capability is not influenced by the
39
For the completeness of the research, the other significant correlations in Table 6 are also discussed.
Years of Work Experience correlates highly with Age (0.916; P< .01), not a surprising result. There is a weak correlation between Hierarchical Level and Years of Experience (0.367; P<.01). There is also a weak correlation between Hierarchical Level and Age (0.332; P<.01). These two correlations are also not very surprising, because in many companies the
management has more work experience and tends to be older than the other employees.
Between intrinsic motivationand Organization Learning Culture, there also is a correlation (0.280; P<.01). This correlation is very weak, but the fact that there is a correlation is consistent with the literature concerning intrinsic motivation (e.g., Amabile et al., 1994). Intrinsically motivated people are interested in learning more, and they want to explore. So it seems that if companies have a learning culture, this would increase the motivation of
intrinsically motivated employees.
CVA capability correlates with Hierarchical Level (0.327; P<.05). This correlation is weak, positive and significant. This indicates that the higher the hierarchical level, the better the individual can anticipate customer value. This could be due to the fact that managers have teams with multiple frontline employees. These different frontline employees generate
information from multiple customers and report back to their management. All these multiple inputs for management could make it possible for them to anticipate customer value better than individual frontline employees. Also, the managers of frontline employees have contact with customers on a different level. They have contact on a management level and obtain information on the strategy of their customers.
