Hedonic or Utilitarian Value Prevails? A Satisfied Clientél Creates Positive Word of Mouth.

Full text

International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change. www.ijicc.net
Volume 15, Issue 4, 2021
487
Hedonic or Utilitarian Value
Prevails? A Satisfied Clientél Creates
Positive Word of Mouth
Asif Mahmood1, Hafiz Haroon ur Rashid2, Edina Molnár3, Shah Ali
Murtaza4, 1Department of Business Studies, Namal Institute, Mianwali 42250,
Pakistan, 2Institute of Business & Management, University of Engineering and
Technology, Lahore, 3,4Institute of Management and Organizational Sciences,
University of Debrecen, Hungary, Email: 1mahmood.engineer@gmail.com;
3molnar.edina.phd@econ.unideb.hu; 4shah.ali.murtaza@econ.unideb.hu
The domain of hedonic and utilitarian values remains relatively
unexplored in Eastern countries. Utilitarian evaluation of the
consumption experience is intellectual, while hedonic evaluation is
full of feelings. Prior studies call for the investigation of hedonic and
utilitarian values in the retail outlets in Eastern countries, which
present an ideal environment for exploration. A conceptual model
marks the relationships between hedonic value, utilitarian value,
customer satisfaction and word of mouth. This model is empirically
tested using survey data collected from retail store shoppers, and
analysed using Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling
(PLS-SEM). The results reveal a significant and positive
relationship between hedonic value and utilitarian value on word of
mouth with the mediating effect of customer satisfaction. This study
bridges the research gap by examining the link between hedonic
value and utilitarian value and its impact in the retail context. It also
provides valuable consideration for managers to know how these
values affect word of mouth with the mediating effect of customer
satisfaction.
Key words: Hedonic Value, Utilitarian Value, Customer Satisfaction, Word of Mouth, Retail
Outlet.
1. Introduction:
As the competition has increased nowadays, companies and organisations have to battle in
different conditions, and for that reason, the competitive advantage that comes to mind is
customer values. These values affect Customer Satisfaction and Word of Mouth created by

International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change. www.ijicc.net
Volume 15, Issue 4, 2021
488
customers and consumers in special ways because it generates relief for customers concerning
the time and ease they spend on making a purchase. Zeithaml (1988) stated a particular
definition of "value" that Value expressed as a trade-off between assumed price and product
quality. Sherry (1990) said that there are two main kinds of useful values regarding shopping
rewards: utilitarian and hedonic values produced by shopping experiences. Mano et al. (1993)
stated that consumer choices are mostly motivated by hedonic and utilitarian preferences.
Consumers choose the new product (Fan), for example, consider the utilitarian elements (e.g.,
Fan Speed) and furthermore consider hedonic characteristics (e.g., plan) (Strahilevitz et al.,
1998). It has been said that different inclinations put a portion of mentalities and item
assessments and enable individuals to recognise products on account of their hedonic or
utilitarian nature. It is helpful to utilise more experience, similar to fun and energy (Designer
garments, mark shoes, sports autos, extravagance watches, and so on), while convenient things
are mostly instruments and capacities (microwave, minivan, PC, etc). So, hedonic and
utilitarian values lead to the difference between performing a step “to get something" as a
contrast to doing it for the reason that "you adore it”. For example, individuals can get outward
rewards (money related prizes, grants, and so on). However, they can likewise accomplish more
inward rewards, passionate and individual motivation from intensely determined delight. These
two factors also play a significant role in making a constructive word of mouth which is a shape
of non-paid promotion for the business. The market is booming with dissimilar stores trying to
enlarge their market share and is caused due to our lenience in this area.
As related to retail stores, the hedonic value and utilitarian value suggest consumers'
perceptions of retail stores, showing the different aspects of customers. i.e., security,
convenience (utilitarian), and stimulation (hedonic); the picture of the protected store is the
degree to which customers are not beset by any hazard with the items' capacity, cost, and
exchange while purchasing at a retail store. The second component, convenience and
reliability, is that the store's atmosphere is friendly and corporative and how quickly you get a
response and how you find the desired products easily, which are the most convenient factors
for retail stores. Finally, entertainment (hedonic) is described in the third image store that how
consumers enjoy while visiting retail stores when buying or hunting out products, whether it
amuses them or not.
The consequences of both values (hedonic and utilitarian) on word of mouth through the
mediating the role of customer satisfaction will help us increase the profits and keep and
generate customers. We obtain the positive word of mouth from our consumers by providing
good utilitarian and hedonic values.
This study expects to clarify the effect of a purchaser obtaining interests (i.e. utilitarian and
hedonic) on customer satisfaction and afterward on word of mouth regarding retail stores. By
building up a conceptual framework for this marvel and testing the proposed hypotheses, this
review gives a superior comprehension of a portion of the determinants of retail store
satisfaction and word of mouth. So, the present study addresses the accompanying inquiry: Are

International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change. www.ijicc.net
Volume 15, Issue 4, 2021
489
the advantages of purchaser spending (i.e. utilitarian and hedonic) originating from the
experience of looking for retail stores items connected to customer satisfaction and word of
mouth, and which value prevails?
Thus, this study would be extremely helpful for the retailers in developing their businesses that
will direct towards the growth of their business and getting a good source of revenue. Besides,
these lessons will support the customers and learn what the situations that occur these days that
establish business developments are.
2. Literature Review:
2.1 Hedonic Value and Utilitarian value:
Babin et al. (1994) expressed that Hedonic and utilitarian results were created through
numerous utilisation exercises uncovered by buyer encounters. There is a developing
requirement for scales to assess the buyer considerations of both hedonic and utilitarian
qualities along these lines. It clarifies the advance of a scale measuring both hedonic and
utilitarian attributes, which is accomplished from the unavoidable utilisation experience of
shopping. The creators advance and legitimise the scale utilising a multi-step handle. Finally,
it demonstrates that unmistakable hedonic and utilitarian's jumping value measurements
introduce and are connected to various significant utilisation factors. Wakefield et al. (1997)
built up the research concerning deals’ advancements and have concentrated on data handling
of moderately uninvolving shopper merchandise for value rebates. It proposed a model of sales
promotion for hedonic utilisation, displaying that purchaser reaction to deals’ advancements is
a component of shoppers' assortment looking for propensities, steadfastness to the specialist
co-op, and view of the estimation of the administration arrangement in relaxation settings.
Heijden (2004) researched that the user acceptance models for a hedonic and utilitarian
information system are different. Hedonic data frameworks aim to deliver self-satisfying
instead of an instrumental incentive to the client; home and relaxation exercises are safely
appended to them, data frameworks utilised for an entertainment viewpoint, and they inspire
the broad as opposed to productive utilisation. It reports an investigation of this specimen holds
the speculations that apparent simplicity and pleasure in utilising are strong determinants of
the plan to use than handiness. The hedonic data framework is a real limit condition to the
legitimacy of the innovation acknowledgment display. In particular, the apparent value has no
longer its overwhelming prescient incentive in connection to convenience and happiness.
Fiore et al. (2005) communicated the utilisation of an online retailer's Web webpage and 103
college understudies have done the test technique, a positive effect of ideal incitement level
and recreational shopping on the hedonic value's way investigation is legitimised through
factual support. The way the research demonstrates revealed striking ways between hedonic
value and creating passionate joy and excitement factors. A style of prominent ways was

International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change. www.ijicc.net
Volume 15, Issue 4, 2021
490
additionally happening between these three factors and worldwide mentality, readiness to buy,
and the ability to belittle the online store. Eun-Ju et al. (2004) expressed that customer value is
the primary purpose of competitive advantage in Internet shopping. This review gives sorts of
web-based shopping value - utilitarian value. Utilising auxiliary condition demonstrating, the
impact of these web-based shopping values upon customers' fulfillment, is resolved. The
outcomes demonstrate that web shopping initiates different sorts of shopping qualities. The
value indicates a beneficial result on consumer loyalty, towards most astounding dedication.
2.2 Customer Satisfaction
McDougall et al. (2000) concentrated the relationship between three components, centre
administration quality, customer satisfaction and future goals crosswise over four
administrations and social administration quality and perceived value. The outcomes display
that centre administration quality (the guarantee) and perceived value were the biggest drivers
of customer satisfaction with social administration quality. An immediate relationship between
customer satisfaction and future expectations was produced. Especially, the hugeness of the
centre administration quality and the perceived value was converse, contingent upon the
administration. A primary supposition was that both perceived value and administration quality
measurements should be absorbed into customer satisfaction models to give a full picture of
the satisfaction drivers.
Gustaffsson et al. (2005), in this review creators, examine the impacts of customer satisfaction,
calculative commitment, and full of feeling responsibility calculative duty on retention and
research, the potential outcomes for situational and social trigger conditions to keep up the
satisfaction–retention relationship. The outcomes keep up steady impacts of customer
satisfaction, calculative commitment, and prior hurl on retention. Prior hurl likewise diminishes
the satisfaction–retention relationship. At long last, the suggestions for both client relationship
supervisors and specialists are who foresee conduct through satisfaction reviews.
2.3 Word of Mouth
Shoppers demonstrate more confidence in the voice of each other than notice by organisations
along these lines. This reflects the quality of expression of mouth (Ng et al., 2011). A great
deal of investigation has demonstrated that casual impacts choice, spread, and arrangements.
Buyers are more inclined to buy DVDs their colleagues propose (Leskovec et al., 2007), and
authorities are more prone to suggest doctors embraced solutions that various pros whom they
know have supported as of now (Iyengar et al., 2011).
Additionally, verbal and online reviews have been exhibited to develop the spread of
information (Goldenberg et al., 2001), bolster new customer acquisitions (Schmitt et al., 2011),
and grow bargains in various things characterisations (Godes et al., 2009). Experts now and
again battle that something ought to be charming to be examined (Hughes, 2005). In his well-

International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change. www.ijicc.net
Volume 15, Issue 4, 2021
491
known book on word of mouth exhibiting, for example, Sernovitz 2006 says that the way to
deal with verbal trade is to "be captivating" and that "nobody talks about debilitating
associations, depleting things, or debilitating ads”.
2.4 Relationship of hedonic and utilitarian values with customer satisfaction:
Satisfaction is conceptualised as an aggregate, worldwide assessment considering involvement
with a firm after some time Colwell et al. (2008) state that utilitarian evaluation of the
utilisation knowledge is extra intellectual while hedonic assessment is full of feeling. Both
hedonic and utilitarian shopping value is related to consumer satisfaction (Jones et al., 2006).
Cottet et al. (2006) set up an optimistic association between shopping values and fulfilment. In
this review, from a nourishment items point of view, hedonic esteem plays a key position in
the satisfaction technique. It clears up satisfaction improved than utilitarian esteem does.
Moreover, Carpenter (2008) examined the connections among buyer shopping worth,
satisfaction and steadfastness in retailing. Jones et al. (2006) account hedonic and utilitarian
values unexpectedly impact satisfaction.
Relate the retailing study set up to a multifaceted liberality to look into setting results in like
outcomes. Babin et al. (2005) state that the eatery client examines and checks both hedonic and
utilitarian values emphatically to transmit customer satisfaction and WOM. Both utilitarian
and hedonic shopping values play similarly essential undertakings in designing customer
satisfaction in a touchable retail setting. Then again, inquiring about a web-based shopping
condition unveils that simply the utilitarian esteem extensively affects buyer satisfaction and
WOM (Overby et al., 2006). To date, coordinating traveller retail encounter studies is slanted
to focus on impalpable encounters. Above all else, visitor shopping examines a review
constrained item buys encounters (e.g., keepsakes and endowments and nearby deliver for
longer-term travellers). Since tourism connects with procedures that can create remarkable
encounters, hedonic esteem, or the fun side of shopping and in addition, utilitarian shopping,
an incentive not out of the ordinary, shows a positive relationship with satisfaction.
McDougall et al. (2000) demonstrated that comprehension of value is the most crucial piece of
administration in customer satisfaction. Baben et al. (1994) explained that both the hedonic and
utilitarian values in purchasing from markets have a favourable result on customer satisfaction.
Also Ryu et al. (2010) demonstrated that an advantage looking for value and welfare looking
for quality has a huge and direct effect on customer satisfaction.
2.5 Relationship of hedonic and utilitarian values with word of mouth:
Past studies set up a positive relationship between hedonic values and word-of-mouth. Offering
to others about the parts of a shopping outing is an approach to improving the shopping
background, elevating the delight, and supporting self-regard. Since utilitarian value identifies
with the psychological part of the shopping background, it too ought to impact word-of-mouth.

International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change. www.ijicc.net
Volume 15, Issue 4, 2021
492
Past studies have demonstrated that hedonic value applies a more grounded positive impact on
word-of-mouth than the utilitarian value (Jones et al., 2006). WOM extends a result of
products’ hedonic values, but it is not expected to be considerably connected with utilitarian
values. This disagreement is based on three grounds.
First, it has been recommended in the literature that WOM suggestions are activated by the
emotional features of consumption knowledge (Jones et al., 2006). Some researchers
conceptualise WOM extend as nil but a procedure through which feelings are shared. It has
been established that people talk about approximately 90% of their emotions to others (Fang et
al., 2011). The emotional encouragement or concentrated emotions experienced in a particular
consumption state of affairs result in a degree of stress in the consumer. In such a state of
affairs, only overwhelming the product is not enough to decrease that stress. Therefore, people
are likely to share those feelings with others to reduce that stress (Westbrook, 1987). Given
that arousing encouragement exists in hedonic consumption and is not expected to be present
in utilitarian consumption, hedonic values are likely to be positively connected to WOM
spread. By the same token, because arousing encouragement is not expected to be present in
utilitarian consumption, utilitarian values are unlikely to affect WOM spread significantly.
The second principle is connected to the intensity of motivation that is encouraged by hedonic
and utilitarian values. When promotion objectives are adequately attained, feelings of
cheeriness and, at the same time, enthusiasm and motivation boost up (Werth et al., 2007). On
the other hand, when avoidance goals are successfully attained, feelings of peace and relaxation
result, but motivation reduces (Werth et al., 2007). Therefore, consumers of the hedonic
settlement are likely to be more motivated to widen WOM, while consumers of the utilitarian
settlement are likely to be less motivated to do so.
The third principle pertains to consumers’ satisfaction. Consumers’ satisfaction has been
recognised in many studies as a significant antecedent of WOM suggestions (De Matos et al.,
2008). It has been established in the text that hedonic features of consumption (e.g. favorable
emotions) are considerably connected with satisfaction, whereas utilitarian features (e.g.
performance) are not (Jones et al., 2006). Also, consumers in an avoidance state of affairs were
more traditional and careful when reporting how pleased they were (Trudel et al., 2012). For
that reason, if hedonic (utilitarian) values are correlated (uncorrelated) with satisfaction, and if
satisfaction is a significant antecedent of WOM suggestions, then hedonic (utilitarian) values
be supposed to be related (unrelated) to WOM spread.
At the point when more noteworthy value was achieved, the individual was persuaded and
fulfilled by the firm and advanced it , for the occasion of positive WOM practices (Luis et al.,
2008). The degree of utilitarian value that the customer gets from the utilitarian elements in an
item is the extent to which it helps her accomplish useful objectives. The degree of hedonic
value the customer gets from hedonic aspects in an item is the extent to which it gives them
delight, pleasure or fun.

International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change. www.ijicc.net
Volume 15, Issue 4, 2021
493
1.6 Theoretical Framework and Hypotheses
The framework of the study is shown in Figure 1. Based on the discussion above, the following
research hypotheses can be formulated:
Figure 1: Theoretical Framework
3. Research Methodology:
The paradigm of our study is positivist in nature. As per Kaboub (2008), positivist logic
clarifies that genuine occasions can be examined exactly and through legitimate thinking. The
study is explanatory and exploratory to recognise the connections and join the distinctive
variables in a single model.
The target of our study is the urban population of Faisalabad, including both males and females
with the payment of a quarter-century (25000) or more. Faisalabad is referred to as the
Manchester of Pakistan. It is a material centre point that includes individuals connected with
the business identified with material and the number of retail locations here is expanding
because of expanding clients. We are taking eight stores from which we will accumulate
information from our examples. We counselled the directors of these stores and discovered the
number of inhabitants in our study to be 263,000. According to Cooper, Schindler, & Sun,
(2003), we used the Convenience sampling technique as our basis for taking samples and took
a sample of two hundred and twenty with a confidence interval of 95% and a precision level of
5%. We utilised the "Shopping centre Intercept Technique" and a Questionnaire for getting
data required for our study.
We used a questionnaire based on 24 questions from different sources for our study. For word
of mouth, we got the behavioural battery by Zeithmal et al. (1996) based on three questions
whose Cronbach alpha is 0 .83 (Lloyd et al., 2014), which is more than 0.7, which shows that
Hedonic
Value
Utilitarian
Value
Word of
Mouth
Customer
Satisfaction

International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change. www.ijicc.net
Volume 15, Issue 4, 2021
494
the dimensions are reliable and valid. For customer satisfaction, we took the questions
developed by Voss et al. (1998); there were six questions whose Cronbach alpha was .890
(Lloyd et al., 2014), which shows that it is reliable and valid. Hedonic value and utilitarian
value were adapted from Babin et al. (1994) and whose Cronbach alpha was 0.94 for hedonic
value and 0.80 for utilitarian value. For the hedonic and utilitarian value of the measures, a
five-point Likert scale was adopted with anchors ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly
agree (5). For customer satisfaction and word of mouth , a Seven-point Likert scale was adopted
with anchors ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (7). The questionnaire is
shown in the Appendix.
For the analysis of the data, two software were used - SPSS 26 and SmartPLS 3. Henseler et
al. (2015) stated that Structural equation modelling (SEM) is utilised to examine data and test
the hypothesis.
4. Data Analysis:
The initial step we embrace in our investigation is the estimation of our external model barring
endogenous and exogenous variables. As we adopt an intelligent model for all our four factors
we will do the accompanying examination as indicated by Hair et al. (2011). Partial least square
structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) is applied through SmartPLS 3. The model is shown
in Figure 2.
Figure 2. The PLS Model

International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change. www.ijicc.net
Volume 15, Issue 4, 2021
495
4.1 Reflective measurement model
4.1.1 Internal consistency reliability
According to Hair et al. (2011), the Composite reliability should be more than 0.7 so, the
indicators show Composite reliability is more than 0.7 in our model shown in Figure 2.
4.1.2 Convergent validity:
According to Hair et al. (2011), the average variance extracted (AVE) must be higher than 0.7
for each variable, so, in table 1, all variables are showing a value greater than 0.7.
Table 1
Reliability
Composite Reliability
Average Variance Extracted
(AVE)
Customer satisfaction
0.985
0.915
Hedonic value
0.978
0.804
Utilitarian value
0.917
0.735
Word of mouth
0.979
0.940
4.1.3 Discriminant Validity:
According to Fornell and Larcker (1981), discriminant validity can be set up if the square root
of the AVE is more than the connection values among the latent variables. So it is according
to the rule.
Table 2
Validity
Customer satisfaction
Hedonic
value
Utilitarian
value
Word of
mouth
Customer satisfaction
0.957
Hedonic value
0.964
0.896
Utilitarian value
0.920
0.933
0.857
Word of mouth 0.956 0.947 0.867 0.970

International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change. www.ijicc.net
Volume 15, Issue 4, 2021
496
4.1.4 Indicator reliability
According to Hair et al. (2011), the variable loading value for every indicator must be more
than 0.7 and on the off chance that it is more than 0.7 hold it otherwise and erase the alternate
indicator; so all are showing the value of more than 0.7 in the table 3.
Table 3
Validity of all indicators
Customer satisfaction Hedonic value
Utilitarian
value
Word of
mouth
cs3.1 0.954
cs3.2
0.962
cs3.3
0.955
cs3.4 0.957
cs3.5
0.970
cs3.6
0.941
hv1.1
0.920
hv1.10
0.903
hv1.11
0.843
hv1.2
0.853
hv1.3
0.930
hv1.4
0.934
hv1.5
0.850
hv1.6
0.871
hv1.7
0.882
hv1.8
0.942
hv1.9
0.924
uv2.1
0.917
uv2.2
0.783
uv2.3
0.820
uv2.4
0.902
wom4.1
0.967
wom4.2
0.978
wom4.3
0.965
4.2 Hypotheses Testing
According to Hair et al. (2011), we have performed the bootstrapping with 5000 samples to
check the hypothesis.

International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change. www.ijicc.net
Volume 15, Issue 4, 2021
497
4.2.1 Path Coefficients:
According to Hair et al. (2011), we have done bootstrapping with the significance level of 5%
and the basic t-value for a two-tailed test is 1.96 and each of the hypotheses is noteworthy as
ρ<α. So we can infer that the path coefficients are significant, as appeared in table 4. According
to Baron and Kenny (1986), the table's values depict that partial mediation exists.
Table 4
Path Coefficients
Original
Sample
(O)
Sample
Mean
(M)
Standard
Deviation
(STDEV)
T Statistics
(|O/STDEV|)
P
Values
Customer satisfaction -> Word of
mouth
0.681 0.683 0.069 9.901 0.000
Hedonic value -> Customer satisfaction
0.818
0.817
0.044
18.522
0.000
Hedonic value -> Word of mouth
0.506
0.501
0.068
7.477
0.000
Utilitarian value -> Customer
satisfaction
0.157 0.157 0.045 3.463 0.001
Utilitarian value -> Word of mouth -0.231 -0.228 0.076 3.036 0.002
Table 5
Bootstrapping Intervals
Original Sample (O)
Sample
Mean (M)
2.5% 97.5%
Customer satisfaction -> Word of mouth
0.681
0.683
0.559
0.829
Hedonic value -> Customer satisfaction
0.818
0.817
0.730
0.904
Hedonic value -> Word of mouth
0.506
0.501
0.358
0.625
Utilitarian value -> Customer satisfaction 0.157 0.157 0.069 0.245
Utilitarian value -> Word of mouth
-0.231
-0.228
-0.393
-0.090
4.2.2 R square:
According to Hair et al. (2011), The R square values in all the independent and mediating
variables, demonstrate the outcome of more than 0.75.
4.2.3 Q square:
According to Hair et al. (2011), the Q² values are more than 0, which demonstrates that the
dependent variable has a predictive significance for the independent and mediating variables.

International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change. www.ijicc.net
Volume 15, Issue 4, 2021
498
4.2.4 Decision of Hypothesis:
The table 6 shows the decisions for the hypotheses.
Table 6
Hypotheses Decisions
Hypothesis
Independent
Variable
Mediating
Variable
Dependent
Variable
Path
coefficients
Decision
H1: there is a
relationship between
hedonic value and
customer satisfaction.
Hedonic value
Customer
satisfaction
0.818
Accepted
H2: there is a
relationship between
utilitarian values and
customer satisfaction.
Utilitarian value
Customer
satisfaction
0.157
Accepted
H3: there is a
relationship between
hedonic value and
word of mouth.
Hedonic value
Word of mouth
0.506
Accepted
H4: there is a
relationship between
utilitarian values and
word of mouth.
Utilitarian value
Word of mouth
-0.231
Accepted
H5: there is a
relationship between
customer satisfaction
and word of mouth.
Customer
satisfaction
Word of mouth
0.681
Accepted
H6: Customer
satisfaction mediates
the relationship
between hedonic value
and word of mouth.
Hedonic value
Customer
satisfaction
Word of mouth
0.506<0.681
Accepted
H7: Customer
satisfaction mediates
the relationship
between utilitarian
value and word of
mouth.
Utilitarian value
Customer
satisfaction
Word of mouth
-0.231<0.681
Accepted
5. Conclusion and discussion
The study consists of two independent variables, hedonic and utilitarian value and one
dependent variable, word of mouth and one mediating variable, customer satisfaction. The
study shows the significant relationship of hedonic value with word of mouth with the
mediation of customer satisfaction. On the other hand, utilitarian value has an inverse

International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change. www.ijicc.net
Volume 15, Issue 4, 2021
499
connection with word of mouth but has a significant relationship after applying the mediation
of customer satisfaction. Through this, we can prove our hypothesis H1, H2, H3, H5, H6, H7
that there is a good connection of hedonic value with word of mouth. Similarly, utilitarian value
has a good relationship with word of mouth by mediating customer satisfaction. For the case
of utilitarian value relation with word of mouth H4, the association is inverse.
Both utilitarian and hedonic shopping value play similarly critical undertakings in organising
consumer satisfaction in a touchable retail setting. Then again, inquire about in an internet
shopping condition unveils that simply the utilitarian value impressively affects shoppers'
satisfaction (Overby et al., 2006). Both hedonic and utilitarian shopping value is completely
related to buyer satisfaction (Babin et al., 1994; Jones et al., 2006). Cottet et al. (2006) set up
that there is a positive association between shopping values and satisfaction. In this
examination, the hedonic value plays a key position in the satisfaction strategy from a food
item's perspective. It clears up that satisfaction is more improved than a utilitarian value is.
Precedent studies set up an optimistic connection between hedonic values and word-of-mouth
(Jones et al., 2006). Because utilitarian value identifies with the psychological part of the
shopping background, it too ought to impact word-of-mouth. Precedent studies have
demonstrated that hedonic value applies a more grounded optimistic impact on word-of-mouth
than the utilitarian value (Jones et al., 2006).
This has assisted us to conclude our research in assessing the rare effect of hedonic value and
utilitarian value in the context of retail stores. This study has revealed its effectiveness in
creating a good customer environment and providing the products/services that a customer
needs in Faisalabad. In today's age, customers have many options regarding purchasing goods
and services found in retail stores. Everyone is challenging on very small margins and trying
to maximise themselves from others. So we have established that to carry on in today's
challenging environment, we need to give an excellent customer environment to entertain and
satisfy our customers, which leads to creating a positive word of mouth.
5.1 Managerial implications
The individuals who run retail outlets – shops - have an extreme decision. From one
perspective, they need to keep clients they have pulled in there to the extent that this would be
possible with the expectation that they will purchase more. Then again, they realise that the
satisfaction of the client with stores which enable them to discover and pay for what they need
inspire the client to give a positive word of mouth. It is an extreme call since a few people need
to appreciate the "shopping", to meander around, see what's on offer, and how many varieties
of products the store has. Other people wanted to fulfil their goal by finding all the products
they wanted. For the previous gathering, having an agreeable and restful time at a retail location
may be welcome alleviation from their regularly bustling lives. For the last gathering, they

International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change. www.ijicc.net
Volume 15, Issue 4, 2021
500
would prefer not to go to another store and another for the unavailable items and would
welcome when they got all their listed items under one roof.
Another test confronting retail store administrators is the expansion in elective shopping
choices and the subsequent need to make their outlets a more alluring spot to shop. This can
occur by giving hedonic and utilitarian incentive to the clients. With the wealth of retail stores
in many developing nations, seeing how hedonic and utilitarian value drive shopping value is
vital for retail store administrators. The value is through which the customers can get what they
want under one roof and entertain themselves by their surroundings. Hedonic and utilitarian
value in the retail stores is a critical means for them to influence the best utilisation of their
chance by taking part in a few exercises in one shopping trip.
In pulling in your clients and influence the fulfilled, this study reveals insight into how the
retail condition can be planned or designed to upgrade hedonic value, which is worried about
the visual peculiarity of regions inside the shopping condition by methods for, for example:
Shading zoning or variety products are placed in their departments so that customers can be
entertained to find the desired product. In a plea to some shoppers, retail store operators can
boost utilitarian value by using a just-in-time inventory or maintaining the inventory of a large
variety of products. Practically speaking, the bunching of stores is done to encourage
customers. The introduction helps in high activity zones or customer decision focuses can
enable customers to discover their way by enhancing data openness. Grasping more current
types of innovation, including cell phone applications that are intended to show the map of the
retail stores and the categories of products so that they can find out where the product has been
placed. Such applications can likewise control a guest in a retail store, enabling them to rapidly
locate an empty parking space and log the vehicle's position. Customers are cautioned to
uncommon offers. This kind of use will probably fare well with more youthful customers who
are okay with utilising innovation.
Retail store administrators can pull in occupants to shops like bistros and bakery shops to
engage their clients in one store to encourage multi-entrusting. A lovely shopping condition
draws in customers to remain longer and return much of the time. The significance of hedonic
and utilitarian shopping value features the requirement for retail store proprietors or
administrators to consider interests in enhancing the fun or charming parts of the retail store
visit, creating customer satisfaction. When customer satisfaction is made, they will
significantly generate positive word of mouth.
5.2 Limitations and future research directions:
Our research covered the area of Faisalabad with just eight stores. Future research can be done
based on covering a vast geographical area covering other cities of the country and extending
the population to achieve more accurate and precise results. It will help retail stores also define
how they can create customer satisfaction of customer and word of mouth. Our research was

International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change. www.ijicc.net
Volume 15, Issue 4, 2021
501
deficient in terms of financial resources. It can go largely in different geographical boundaries
with a large population in other service industries including retail stores. The other variables
can be added to the study.
REFERENCES
Babin, B. J., Darden, W. R., & Griffin, M. (1994). Work and/or fun:measuring hedonic and
utilitarian shopping value. Journal of consumer research, 644-656.
Babin, B. J., Lee, Y. K., Kim, E. J., & Griffin, M. (2005). Modeling consumer satisfaction and
word-of-mouth: Restaurant patronage in Korea.Journal of Services Marketing, 19,133-
139
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social
psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of
personality and social psychology, 51(6), 1173.
Carpenter, J. M. (2008). Consumer shopping value, satisfaction and loyalty indiscount
retailing. Journal ofRetailing & Consumer Services, 15(5), 358-363.
Colwell, S.R., Aung, M., Kanetkar, V. and Holden, A.L. (2008), “Toward a measure of
serviceconvenience: multiple-item scale development and empirical test”, Journal of
Services Marketing, 22, 2, 160-169.
Cooper, D. R., Schindler, P. S., & Sun, J. (2003). Business research methods.
Cottet, P., Lichtlé, M., &Plichon, V. (2006). The role of value in services: a study in a retail
environment.Journal of Consumer Marketing, 23(4/5), 219-227.
De Matos, C. A., & Rossi, C. A. V. (2008). Word-of-mouth communications in marketing: A
metaanalyticreview of the antecedents and moderators. Journal of the Academy of
MarketingScience, 36(4), 578-596.
Eun-Ju, L., & Overby, J. W. (2004). Creating value for online shoppers: Implications for
satisfaction and loyalty. Journal of Consumer Satisfaction, Dissatisfaction and
complaining behavior, 17, 54.
Fang, C., Lin, T. M. Y., Liu, F., & Lin, Y. H. (2011). Product type and word of mouth: A
dyadic perspective. Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing, 5(2/3), 189-202.
Fiore, A. M., Jin, H., & Kim, J. (2005). For fun and profit: Hedonic value from
imageinteractivity and responses toward an online store. Psychology and Marketing,
22(8), 669.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Structural equation models with unobservable variables
and measurement error: Algebra and statistics. Journal of marketing research, 382-388.
Godes, D., &Mayzlin, D. (2009). Firm-created word-of-mouth communication: Evidence
from a field test. Marketing Science, 28(4), 721-739.
Goldenberg, J., Libai, B., & Muller, E. (2001). Talk of the network: A complex systems look
at the underlying process of word-of-mouth. Marketing letters, 12(3), 211-223.

International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change. www.ijicc.net
Volume 15, Issue 4, 2021
502
Gustafsson, A., Johnson, M. D., & Roos, I. (2005). The effects of customer satisfaction,
relationship commitment dimensions, and triggers on customer retention. Journal of
marketing, 69(4), 210-218.
Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2011). PLS-SEM: Indeed a silver bullet. Journal of
Marketing theory and Practice, 19(2), 139-152.
Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant
validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of
Marketing Science, 43(1), 115-135.
Iyengar, R., Van den Bulte, C., & Valente, T. W. (2011). Opinion leadership and social
contagion in new product diffusion. Marketing Science, 30(2), 195-212.
Jones, M. A., Reynolds, K. E., & Arnold, M. J. (2006). Hedonic and utilitarian shopping
value: Investigating differential effects on retail outcomes. Journal of Business
Research, 59(9), 974-981.
Kaboub, F. (2008). Positivist paradigm. Leong, Encyclopedia of Counselling, Thousand Oaks,
786-787.
Leskovec, J., Adamic, L. A., & Huberman, B. A. (2007). The dynamics of viral marketing.
ACM Transactions on the Web (TWEB), 1(1), 5.
Lloyd, D., & Thomas, P. (2014). Culture and the State. Routledge.
Luis C, Carlos F and Migue G (2008) The role of perceived usability, reputation, satisfaction
and consumer familiarity on the website loyalty formation process, Computer Human
Behavior, 24, 2, 325-345.
Mano, H., & Oliver, R. L. (1993). Assessing the dimensionality and structure of the
consumption experience: evaluation, feeling, and satisfaction. Journal of Consumer
research, 20(3), 451-466.
McDougall, G. H., & Levesque, T. (2000). Customer satisfaction with services: putting
perceived value into the equation. Journal of services marketing, 14(5), 392-410.
Ng, S., David, M. E., & Dagger, T. S. (2011). Generating positive word-of-mouth in the service
experience. Managing Service Quality: An International Journal, 21(2), 133-151.
Overby, J. W., & Lee, E. J. (2006). The effects of utilitarian and hedonic online shoppingvalue
on consumer preference and intentions. Journal of Business Research, 59,1160–1166.
Ryu, K., Han, H., & Jang, S. (2010). Relationships among hedonic and utilitarian values,
satisfaction and behavioral intentions in the fast-casual restaurant industry. International
Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 22(3), 416-432.
Schmitt, P., Skiera, B., & Van den Bulte, C. (2011).Referral programs and customer
value.Journal of Marketing, 75(1), 46-59.
Sernovitz, Andy (2006), Word of Mouth Marketing: How Smart Companies Get People
Talking, Chicago: Kaplan Publishing. Silvia, Paul J.(2006), Exploring the Psychology of
Interest, New York Oxford University Press
Sherry, J. F. (1990). A sociocultural analysis of a Midwestern American flea market. Journal
of Consumer Research, 17(1), 13-30.

International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change. www.ijicc.net
Volume 15, Issue 4, 2021
503
Strahilevitz, M., & Myers, J. G. (1998). Donations to charity as purchase incentives: How well
they work may depend on what you are trying to sell. Journal of consumer research,
24(4), 434-446.
Trudel, R., Murray, K. B., &Cotte, J. (2012). Beyond expectations: The effect of regulatory
focus onconsumer satisfaction. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 29(1),
93-97.
Van der Heijden, H. (2004). User acceptance of hedonic information systems. MIS quarterly,
695-704.
Voss, G. B., Parasuraman, A., & Grewal, D. (1998). The roles of price, performance, and
expectations in determining satisfaction in service exchanges. The Journal of Marketing,
46-61.
Wakefield, K. L., & Barnes, J. H. (1997).Retailing hedonic consumption: a model of sales
promotion of a leisure service. Journal of Retailing, 72(4), 409-427.
Werth, L., &Foerster, J. (2007). How regulatory focus influences consumer behavior. European
Journal of Social Psychology, 37(1), 33-51.
Westbrook, R.A. (1987), “Product/consumption-based affective responses and postpurchase
processes”, Journal of Marketing Research, 24, 3, 258-270.
Zeithaml, V. A. (1988). Consumer perceptions of price, quality, and value: a means-end model
and synthesis of evidence. The Journal of marketing, 2-22.
Zeithaml, V. A., Berry, L. L., & Parasuraman, A. (1996). The behavioral consequences of
service quality. the Journal of Marketing, 31-46.

International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change. www.ijicc.net
Volume 15, Issue 4, 2021
504
Appendix:
The following statements concern your perception about your retail store services. Select your
store of these below and please indicate the extent of your agreement and disagreement by
ticking (√) the appropriate number.
These are the Retail Stores and fill the questionnaire according to any one of these:
E-Mart Fsd. K-Mart Fsd.
SB Fsd. Alfatah Fsd.
Bambino Fsd. Metro Fsd.
City Mega Mart Fsd.
Saleemi Home PlusFsd.
Hedonic value:
1. This shopping trip was truly a joy?
1. Strongly Disagree 2. Disagree 3. Neutral. 4. Agree 5. Strongly Agree.
2. I continued to shop, not because I had to, but because I wanted to?
1. Strongly Disagree 2. Disagree 3. Neutral. 4. Agree 5. Strongly Agree.
3. This shopping trip truly felt like an escape?
1. Strongly Disagree 2. Disagree 3. Neutral. 4. Agree 5. Strongly Agree.
4. Compared to other things I could have done, the time spent shopping was truly enjoyable?
Name (optional) :
Gender : Male Female
Occupation: Business Job Other
Age :20-30 31-40 41-50
51-60 above then 60
Experience with this store in years
Less than 1 year 1- 5 year
5-10 year 10 years and above
Education: Matric, Intermediate,
Bachelor, Master, M.phil, PHD
Monthly Income: 30000-40000 41000-50000, 51000-60000, 61000-100000, 100000 AND ABOVE
Frequency of visit per month: Once in a month Twice in a month 3-4 times in a month More than 5 times
Scale
The response scale is: 1. Strongly Disagree 2. Disagree 3. Neutral. 4. Agree
5. Strongly Agree

International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change. www.ijicc.net
Volume 15, Issue 4, 2021
505
1. Strongly Disagree 2. Disagree 3. Neutral. 4. Agree 5. Strongly Agree.
5. I enjoyed being immersed in exciting new products?
1. Strongly Disagree 2. Disagree 3. Neutral. 4. Agree 5. Strongly Agree.
6. I enjoyed this shopping trip for its own sake, not just for the items I may have purchased?
1. Strongly Disagree 2. Disagree 3. Neutral. 4. Agree 5. Strongly Agree.
7. I had a good time because I was able to act on the "spur-of-the-moment."
1. Strongly Disagree 2. Disagree 3. Neutral. 4. Agree 5. Strongly Agree.
8. During the trip, I felt the excitement of the hunt.
1. Strongly Disagree 2. Disagree 3. Neutral. 4. Agree 5. Strongly Agree.
9. While shopping, I was able to forget my problems.
1. Strongly Disagree 2. Disagree 3. Neutral. 4. Agree 5. Strongly Agree.
10. While shopping, I felt a sense of adventure.
1. Strongly Disagree 2. Disagree 3. Neutral. 4. Agree 5. Strongly Agree.
11. This shopping trip was not a very nice time out.
1. Strongly Disagree 2. Disagree 3. Neutral. 4. Agree 5. Strongly Agree.
Utilitarian Value:
12. I accomplished just what I wanted to on this shopping trip.
1. Strongly Disagree 2. Disagree 3. Neutral. 4. Agree 5. Strongly Agree.
13. I couldn't buy what I really needed.
1. Strongly Disagree 2. Disagree 3. Neutral. 4. Agree 5. Strongly Agree.
14. While shopping, I found just the item(s) I was looking for
1. Strongly Disagree 2. Disagree 3. Neutral. 4. Agree 5. Strongly Agree.
15. I was disappointed because I had to go to another store(s) to complete my shopping.
1. Strongly Disagree 2. Disagree 3. Neutral. 4. Agree 5. Strongly Agree.

International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change. www.ijicc.net
Volume 15, Issue 4, 2021
506
Customer Satisfaction:
16. I am pleased with the overall service at this store?
1. Strongly Disagree 2.Disagree 3.Somewhat disagree 4.Neutral 5.Somewhat Agree
6.Agree 7.Strongly Agree
17. Shopping at this store is a delightful experience?
1. Strongly Disagree 2.Disagree 3.Somewhat disagree 4.Neutral 5.Somewhat Agree
6.Agree 7.Strongly Agree
18. I am completely satisfied with this store shopping experience?
1. Strongly Disagree 2.Disagree 3.Somewhat disagree 4.Neutral 5.Somewhat Agree
6.Agree 7.Strongly Agree
19. I am pleased with the overall service at this store?
1. Strongly Disagree 2.Disagree 3.Somewhat disagree 4.Neutral 5.Somewhat Agree
6.Agree 7.Strongly Agree
20. Taking my car in for service at this store is a pleasant experience?
1. Strongly Disagree 2.Disagree 3.Somewhat disagree 4.Neutral 5.Somewhat Agree
6.Agree 7.Strongly Agree.
21. I am completely satisfied with the service this store provides?
1. Strongly Disagree 2.Disagree 3.Somewhat disagree 4.Neutral 5.Somewhat Agree
6.Agree 7.Strongly Agree.
Word of mouth:
22. Say positive things about this store to other people?
1. Strongly Disagree 2.Disagree 3.Somewhat disagree 4.Neutral 5.Somewhat Agree
6.Agree 7.Strongly Agree.
23. Recommend this store to someone who seeks your advice?
1. Strongly Disagree 2.Disagree 3.Somewhat disagree 4.Neutral 5.Somewhat Agree
6.Agree 7.Strongly Agree.
24. Encourage friends and relatives to do business with this store?
1. Strongly Disagree 2.Disagree 3.Somewhat disagree 4.Neutral 5.Somewhat Agree
6.Agree 7.Strongly Agree
Scale
The response scale is: 1. Strongly Disagree 2. Disagree 3.Somewhat disagree 4.
Neutral
. 5. Somewhat Agree 6. Agree 7. Strongly Agree