I also agree that customer value and customer satisfaction can be interdependent, that there always has to be customer value in order to have customer satisfaction and vice versa in very case.
I also do believe it is possible to have one without the other, but not all the time.
As Katie states, it is true that there must be some sort of customer value in order for a customer to partake in customer value. This being so because a customer is more likely to be satisfied with their purchased good or service if they are more aware of what they are actually going to receive for what they paid. Rather than just purchasing something without analyzing it, then getting something other than what the customer believe they would receive.
However, I do question one point that Katie makes about a customer is more likely to assume a higher value with a product if it is priced higher than if it is priced lower. I do not believe that is always the case.
When looking at different products or services, obviously there will be an understandable difference in price depending on what it is. But when looking at products that are int he same market, but different brands, I do not necessarily believe that higher price is associated with higher quality.
For instance if one person were to buy a 'generic brand' of paper towels over a name brand of paper towels, one would assume you would pay less for the generic rather than a name brand. This price difference though, is not necessarily existent based off of a difference is quality, but rather paying for the design of the package. Both paper towels work the exact same, yet one of them is two dollars more.
Would you agree that when paying for a product of 'name brand' (i.e. Tide, Heinz, Dove) over a 'generic brand' (i.e. Great Value, Shaws, Market Basket) you are paying more for quality, or rather paying for the design?
No comments:
Post a Comment