Where Is Customer Experience (CX) Research Heading? A Personal Commentary

Abstract

Purpose: This paper aims to comment on the evolution of customer experience research from a customer experience researcher, practitioner, and consumer viewpoint.

Design/methodology/approach: This commentary is a reflection based on the investigations put forward in this special issue, extant academic and managerial literature, and personal perspectives.

Findings: While nascent in terms of constructs, CX has developed satisfactorily from a research perspective. That being said, CX research that guides and aids managerial practices is still lacking. Without being relevant to practice, CX research might fail to deliver on its promise to shape practice and positively impact consumers and their experiences.

Research limitations/implications: Service marketing researchers are encouraged to consider the current "status quo" of CX research and how a possible repositioning and refocusing of their efforts could advance CX research and, more importantly, CX practices.

Practical implications: CX practitioners can indeed learn from CX researchers if research aligns with the aim of guiding and assisting practices.

Originality/value: This special issue expands our understanding of the effect of physical context on customer experience. The commentary challenges the overall direction in which CX research is heading and offers valuable guidance on how to turn these challenges into opportunities.

Full text

1
Where Is Customer Experience (CX) Research Heading? A Personal Commentary
Philipp “Phil” Klaus
Professor of Customer Experience Strategy and Management, International University of
Monaco, Omnes Education Research Center, 2 Avenue Albert II, 98000 Monaco, Monaco
phone+377 97 98 69 86, email: pklaus@monaco.edu
Please cite as:
Klaus Ph. (2022), "Where Is Customer Experience (CX) Research Heading? A Personal
Commentary," Journal of Services Marketing. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSM-05-2022-0169
Author Biography
Philipp ‘Phil’ Klaus is widely considered one of the leading global Customer Experience
Strategists. He is one of the World’s Top 2% of Scientists, Professor of Customer Experience
Strategy and Management at the International University of Monaco, the founder of Dr. Phil Klaus
& Associates Consulting, best-selling author of “Measuring Customer Experience—How to
Develop and Execute the Most Profitable Customer Experience Strategies,” Chairman of the PK
Customer Experience Institute, and holds multiple visiting professorships around the globe. His
award-winning research has appeared in a wide range of top-tier academic and managerial journals
and numerous books. He is a frequent keynote speaker at public and in-company seminars and
conferences around the world. He is an experienced manager and management consultant with an
active, international portfolio of Blue-Chip clients for whom he advises on customer experience
strategy, profit enhancement, “next practice,” and business development.

2
Where Is Customer Experience (CX) Research Heading? A Personal Commentary
Purpose:
This paper aims to comment on the evolution of customer experience research from a customer
experience researcher, practitioner, and consumer viewpoint.
Design/methodology/approach:
This commentary is a reflection based on the investigations put forward in this special issue,
extant academic and managerial literature, and personal perspectives.
Findings:
While nascent in terms of constructs, CX has developed satisfactorily from a research
perspective. That being said, CX research that guides and aids managerial practices is still
lacking. Without being relevant to practice, CX research might fail to deliver on its promise to
shape practice and positively impact consumers and their experiences.
Research limitations/implications:
Service marketing researchers are encouraged to consider the current “status quo” of CX
research and how a possible repositioning and refocusing of their efforts could advance CX
research and, more importantly, CX practices.
Practical implications:
CX practitioners can indeed learn from CX researchers if research aligns with the aim of guiding
and assisting practices.
Originality/value:
This special issue expands our understanding of the effect of physical context on customer
experience. The commentary challenges the overall direction in which CX research is heading
and offers valuable guidance on how to turn these challenges into opportunities.

3
Where Is Customer Experience (CX) Research Heading? A Personal Commentary
Introduction
Allow me to take you on a journey. Along the way, you will learn about some of my colleagues
and my thoughts on how to write a commentary on CX research.
Guest Editor Dr. Helen Bruce kindly invited me to share my thoughts on this special
issue focusing on the effect of the physical context on customer experience. Thank you, Helen,
for giving me this opportunity.
While looking at other commentaries, I found some excellent examples, such as
Rosenbaum et al. (2017) and Cronin (2021). While I appreciate my colleagues’ work, I couldn’t
help but notice that their style did not necessarily reflect what I am trying to convey here: my
passion for CX research. The more I read, I noticed that the line between commentary and
viewpoint is often blurry, enriching rather than limiting the author’s work. I base this
observation, biased by default, on my readings of multiple commentaries. I have seen
commentaries including personal reflections and perspectives as more personal, dynamic, and
impactful. For example, Bateson (2021) reports on personal experiences of aging and
servicescapes from both a researcher’s and consumer’s viewpoint, raising points most relevant to
this special issue.
One could presume an absence of clear guidance on what constitutes a commentary.
Commentaries range from highly quantitative pieces, such as Kunz et al. (2019), to personal
reflections, such as Deighton (1997). Most, though, are positioned between these anchor points,
reminding me of the analysis of marketing practices conducted by Coviello et al. in 2002. The
tendency to “stand on the shoulders of giants” is embedded in us as researchers; we accept and
appreciate the function and necessity of this dynamic. But I often ask myself whether we are
losing some of the richness that would allow us to advance our science. By richness, I refer to the
fact that so many of the insights that my valued colleagues, managers, clients, and friends have
shared with me have yet to appear in a peer-reviewed publication. Does that mean they are less
relevant, valuable, or important to advancing CX and CX research? This is where commentaries
allow researchers to go “beyond the data at hand” by including thoughts and perceptions they
collected from their experiences. Every journal editor who permits and even encourages these

4
commentaries and viewpoints should be applauded. After all, disagreement leads to knowledge
advancement (Pomerantz, 1984). Therefore, we should allow more space for views contrary to
our current state.
The remainder of the paper is organized as follows: I will take the liberty to use this
opportunity to first, outline the effects of the physical context on CX, the focus of the Special
Issue. From this context-specific view I will take a more global view of consumers and managers
CX perceptions. These two themes will allow me to introduce my take on the current state of CX
research and opportunities I see arising. I will examine in more detail two themes I believe might
be of particular interest, the ordinary/citizenship experience, and the challenge of CX as a
holistic and dynamic construct. With this in mind, I now comment on the aim, objectives, and
scope of this special issue in the broader context of CX research development.
The Effect of Physical Context on CX
The call for this special issue highlights that despite the rise of digital and virtual services,
physical context still significantly impacts the customer experience. The authors refer to service
contexts, including tourism and education, as ripe for heavy investment in physical settings. The
argument reflects a service focus, thus emphasizing one of the CX research conundrums: the
confusion of differentiating between services and customer experience (Gopalani and Shick,
2011; Klaus and Maklan, 2012). Recently researchers (e.g., De Keyser et al., 2020) highlight that
experiences do not emerge from service encounters, and therefore the service experience as a
specific context alone. Thus, the customer experience needs to be seen as a more holistic
construct (Lemon and Verhoef, 2016). At the core of the service experience argument lies the
assumption that customers’ experiential perceptions develop according to context (e.g., Lemke et
al., 2010). Researchers have frequently challenged this notion (e.g., Roy, 2018), and there seems
to be no clear consensus regarding whether CX is indeed context-specific.
CX’s holistic nature poses a challenge to CX research, which traditionally focuses on
context-specific contributions (De Keyser et al., 2020). With new insights come new contexts to
test in the hopes of broadening the generalizability of findings. This process, while thorough,
doesn’t allow itself to keep pace with practice (Eckhardt et al., 2019). Rosenbaum and Russell-
Bennett (2019) confirm this fact, adding that researchers often overstretch their findings’
generalizability to compensate for this shortcoming. That indicates that researchers can convert

5
findings from substantive theories towards more generalizable theories and applications
(Kuppelwieser and Klaus, 2020). Subsequently, by focusing on one aspect or context (in this
case, the effect of physical contexts on CX), special issues can be instrumental in accelerating
the development toward generalizability.
Physical context is a part of the overall customer experience, from brick-and-mortar retail
(Pauwels and Neslin, 2015) and tourism (Adhikari and Bhattacharya, 2016) to hospitality (Wall
and Berry, 2007) and other contexts highlighted by the contributions in this special issue.
However, certain trends hinder the generalizability of these findings. One of these trends is that
most new businesses are, first and foremost, digital in nature (Kraus et al., 2018). While one
could argue that in a traditional business setting omnichannel management increases the
importance of digital integration to provide a desirable CX, the majority of new business
platforms are based upon and enabled by digital technology platforms (Ciriello, Richter, and
Schwabe, 2018). In these cases, the physical context is either irrelevant or simply a possible
component of future business extensions (Zaki, 2019). Another trend limiting the applicability of
the findings is the tendency toward an omnichannel setting (e.g., Thaichon et al., 2020). This
supports the notion that CX begs holistic rather than context-specific research (Petermans et al.,
2013). The consumer is one key stakeholder who seems to understand CX’s holistic nature
(Trischler et al., 2018).
Consumer and Managerial CX Perceptions
Researchers argue that customer experience is a key element of customers’ perceptions of
marketplace offerings and entails “every point of contact at which the customer interacts with the
business, product, or service” (Grewal et al., 2009, p. 1). Customer experience, while also
connected to the process of experiencing, is frequently linked to stimulus-based attributes and
customers’ reactions and attitudes to a stimulus (Lipkin, 2016). Customer experience has, for
example, been defined as the “evolvement of a person’s sensorial, affective, cognitive, relational,
and behavioral responses to a firm or brand by living through a journey of touchpoints along pre-
purchase, purchase, and post-purchase situations and continually judging this journey against
response thresholds of co-occurring experiences in a person’s related environment” (Homburg et
al., 2017, p. 384). Like quality and satisfaction, experiences are holistic and emerge from
customers’ interactions with products, services, companies, brands, and relationships. Thus,

6
consumers perceive the customer experience as an ongoing, dynamic process (McColl-Kennedy
et al., 2015). Because of this dynamic nature, static applications or processes, such as focusing
on a particular part or context of the experience, will not deliver the insights researchers and
managers are looking for (Verhoef et al., 2009). While it might be a start to build substantive
insights, this ‘bottom up’, mostly static approach needs to be complemented and extended upon
to gain insights mirroring the CX phenomenon more closely. If we agree that the customer
experience can only be sufficiently investigated by addressing CX’s dynamic and holistic nature,
then we must extend this notion by delivering managerially relevant research. We can achieve
this by developing research that links customer experiences to consumer behavior, such as
purchasing and word-of-mouth behavior. Only research linking the above to managerial
applications and business performance will close this gap.
CX Research—Where Are We Now?
CX’s conceptual roots sit in extensive examinations of customer satisfaction, perceived quality,
and value in various empirical settings (e.g., Homburg et al., 2017), and a move away from more
traditional product-related marketing practices (Shostack, 1977). This experience frequently
details consumers’ perceptions of firm-controlled factors, such as promotion, price, merchandise,
supply chain, and location (Grewal et al., 2009). However, the CX phenomenon is much larger,
with customer experience having been defined as “the internal and subjective response customers
have to any direct or indirect contact with the company” (Meyer and Schwager, 2007, p. 118).
Researchers are understandably interested in nuances and types of experiences for the
aforementioned reasons. While customer experience is an all-encompassing construct, the
existing literature frequently centers on extraordinary experiences related to, for example,
hedonic shopping (Arnold and Reynolds, 2003). Consumers seek unique experiences in their
pursuit of adventure (Jensen et al., 2015) and simple enjoyment (Hirschman and Holbrook,
1982). The ensuing memorable, extraordinary, and unique experiences (Arnould and Price,
1993) create positive emotions, boosting consumers’ purchasing frequency and loyalty
(Schouten et al., 2007). Research has justifiably concentrated on these extraordinary experiences
(Arnould and Price, 1993), memorable emotions, aspirations, and sensations (Pine and Gilmore,
1998). Figure 1, using a bibliometric Leximancer software analysis, following the guidance of

7
Donthu et al. (2021) visualizes the origins and relationships between the corresponding customer
experience research. It provides an overview to establish that CX literature revolves around the
theme of extraordinary experiences.
Figure 1 CX Extraordinary Experiences Theme
Different research streams have emerged from the extraordinary experience theme. The
work of Verhoef et al. (2009), and the corresponding Journal of Retailing special issue
summarizing and stimulating different streams, focused on value and customer experience
management research (Lemon and Verhoef, 2016). I call this development the “second wave of
CX research” (see Figure 2 for a visualization). The following Figure 2 visualizes the seminal
works of this second CX research wave and the relationships between these studies.

8
Figure 2 Second Wave of Customer Experience Literature
Us taking stock entails a look into the future and a critical assessment of the most recent past,
which I will discuss in the next section.
CX Research—Where Shall We Go from Here?
Theory is born in practice, is refined in research, and must return to practice if research is to
entail more than draining energy from the main business beyond idle speculation. I often refer to
Dickoff et al. (1968) to remind myself of my aim as a CX researcher: to guide and support
practice. By practice, I refer not only to the usual B2C but also to government-to-citizen (G2C)
experiences, which are, regrettably, except for some of our colleagues’ work (e.g., Abella et al.,
2019), often forgotten. Therefore, I was delighted to see this special issue’s call for papers on a

9
collective view of experiences. By focusing on society, researchers will also deliver impactful
work that can guide managers and governments alike in increasing our overall quality of life and
well-being. The latter two are great examples of how we, as researchers, can impact outcomes
that have an overarching positive effect on society.
This leads me to reflect on where we are and where we can go. While I am aware that
Figures 1 and 2 may oversimplify CX research and its achievements, I cannot help taking a long
look in the mirror and asking myself how much we have progressed since the 2016 Lemon and
Verhoef paper, outlining plenty of opportunities, many of them resonating with my earlier
thoughts. I know we can do better than this. I am confident that CX researchers can have a
tremendous impact on CX practices. We have an unprecedented opportunity to change practices
toward delivering better experiences for consumers/citizens around the globe. In the next section,
I highlight some of these opportunities.
Ordinary and Citizenship Experiences
Carù and Cova (2003) critiqued the overemphasis of research focusing on extraordinary events.
They argued that underlining various customer experience intensity levels will offer a richer
appreciation of CX’s potential and its influence on customers’ lives. I agree with this notion and
encourage researchers to explore customers’ everyday lives and experiences (Kranzbühler et al.,
2018). While extraordinary experiences create stronger emotions, ordinary experiences can
stimulate important customer outcomes (Carù and Cova, 2003). Ordinary experiences create
long-lasting impact through their regularity and immersion in all areas of everyday life
(Bhattacharjee and Mogilner, 2014). Thus, they are perfectly suited not only for generalizable
insights but also for important customer and citizen outcomes, such as well-being and quality of
life. Additionally, they deliver insights that can only be generated and conceptualized from a
consumer’s viewpoint.
CX’s Dynamic and Holistic Nature
I am confident we can agree that CX’s dynamic and holistic nature has yet not been addressed
sufficiently. This leads to numerous opportunities. For example, as Babin et al. (2020) point out,
referring to Kuppelwieser and Klaus (2021), researchers could challenge CX’s proposed multi-

10
dimensional nature. This, in turn, could lead to the development of generalizable scales, which
link to managerial aims and objectives more easily.
Recall that managers are interested in and think in overall perceptions rather than silos
and contexts. From my own experience with clients, I can share that managers are interested in
what all their targets have in common. Only when this is established and known throughout the
organization are managers interested in more granular insights according to their segmentation
and targeting practices. Subsequently, researchers could think in terms of looking at platforms
generating generalizable CX insights rather than contexts.
Alternatively, researchers could explore generalizable dynamics different customer
segments have in common. For example, how do consumers perceive their experiences with a
particular provider/service offering when they first interact versus when the interactions repeat or
become more frequent? We also need to keep in mind which communications strategies will
work best with managers to connect with their customers and what methods address CX’s
dynamic nature in the best possible way (for a complete review, see Klaus, 2019).
Please recall that the methods we use to develop theory are different from the way
practices are developed. We need to at least contemplate changing our approaches and methods
accordingly. Figure 3 highlights some of the research opportunities arising from my
commentary.

11
Figure 3 CX Research Opportunities

 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  

12
References
Abella, A., Ortiz-de-Urbina-Criado, M. and De-Pablos-Heredero, C. (2019), “A methodology to
design and redesign services in smart cities based on the citizen experience”, Information Polity,
Vol. 24 No. 2, pp. 183-197.
Adhikari, A. and Bhattacharya, S. (2016), “Appraisal of literature on customer experience in
tourism sector: review and framework”, Current Issues in Tourism, Vol. 19 No. 4, pp. 296-321.
Arnould, E.J. and Price, L.L. (1993), “River magic: extraordinary experience and the extended
service encounter”, Journal of Consumer Research, 20(1), pp. 24-45.
Arnold, M.J. and Reynolds, K.E. (2003), “Hedonic shopping motivations”, Journal of Retailing,
Vol. 79 No. 2, pp. 77-95.
Babin, B.J., Ortinau, D.J., Herrmann, J.L. and Lopez, C. (2021), “Science is about corroborating
empirical evidence, even in academic business research journals”, Journal of Business Research,
Vol. 126, pp. 504-511.
Bateson, J. (2021), “Researcher or respondent: a personal commentary on ageing and the
servicescape”, Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 35 No. 1, pp. 7-13.
Bhattacharjee, A. and Mogilner, C. (2014), “Happiness from ordinary and extraordinary
experiences”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 41 No. 1, pp. 1-17.
Carù, A., & Cova, B. (2003). Revisiting consumption experience: A more humble but complete
view of the concept. Marketing theory, 3(2), 267-286.
Ciriello, R. F., Richter, A., & Schwabe, G. (2018). Digital innovation. Business & Information
Systems Engineering, 60(6), 563-569.

13
Coviello, N.E., Brodie, R.J., Danaher, P.J. and Johnston, W.J. (2002), “How firms relate to their
markets: an empirical examination of contemporary marketing practices”, Journal of Marketing,
Vol. 66 No. 3, pp. 33-46.
Cronin Jr, J.J. (2021), “A commentary on ‘the role of services in the future’”, Journal of
Marketing Theory and Practice, Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 23-36.
De Keyser, A., Verleye, K., Lemon, K. N., Keiningham, T. L., & Klaus, P. (2020). Moving the
customer experience field forward: introducing the touchpoints, context, qualities (TCQ)
nomenclature. Journal of Service Research, 23(4), 433-455.
Deighton, J. (1997), “Commentary on ‘exploring the implications of the internet for consumer
marketing’”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 25 No. 4, pp. 347-351.
Dickoff, J., James, P. and Wiedenbach, E. (1968), “Theory in a practice discipline: part 1.
Practice oriented theory”, Nursing Research, Vol. 17 No. 5, pp. 415-434.
Eckhardt, G.M., Houston, M.B., Jiang, B., Lamberton, C., Rindfleisch, A. and Zervas, G. (2019),
“Marketing in the sharing economy”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 83 No. 5, pp. 5-27.
Gopalani, A. and Shick, K. (2011), “The service-enabled customer experience: a jump-start to
competitive advantage”, Journal of Business Strategy, Vol. 32 No. 3, pp. 4-12.
Grewal, D., Levy, M. and Kumar, V. (2009), “Customer experience management in retailing: an
organizing framework”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 85 No. 1, pp. 1-14.
Hirschman, E.C. and Holbrook, M.B. (1982), “Hedonic consumption: emerging concepts,
methods and propositions”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 46 No. 3, pp. 92-101.

14
Homburg, C., Jozić, D. and Kuehnl, C. (2017), “Customer experience management: toward
implementing an evolving marketing concept”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,
Vol. 45 No. 3, pp. 377-401.
Jensen, Ø., Lindberg, F. and Østergaard, P. (2015), “How can consumer research contribute to
increased understanding of tourist experiences? A conceptual review”, Scandinavian Journal of
Hospitality and Tourism, Vol. 15 Sup 1, pp. 9-27.
Klaus, P. (2019), “Conveying managerial relevance into service research”, Journal of Services
Marketing, Vol. 33 No. 1, pp. 104-111.
Klaus, Ph. and Kuppelwieser, V. (2021). Guiding directions and propositions: Placing dynamics
at the heart of customer experience (CX) research. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services,
59, 102429.
Klaus, P. and Maklan, S. (2012), “EXQ: a multiple-item scale for assessing service experience”,
Journal of Service Management, Vol. 23 No. 1, pp. 5-33.
Kranzbühler, A.M., Kleijnen, M.H., Morgan, R.E. and Teerling, M. (2018), “The multilevel
nature of customer experience research: an integrative review and research agenda”,
International Journal of Management Reviews, Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 433-456.
Kraus, S., Palmer, C., Kailer, N., Kallinger, F.L. and Spitzer, J. (2018), “Digital
entrepreneurship: a research agenda on new business models for the twenty-first century”,
International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, Vol. 25 No. 2, pp. 353-375.
Kunz, W.H., Heinonen, K. and Lemmink, J.G. (2019), “Future service technologies: is service
research on track with business reality?”, Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 33 No. 4, pp. 479-
487.

15
Kuppelwieser, V., & Klaus, P. (2020). Guest editorial: age is a construct, not a characteristic.
Journal of Services Marketing, 35(1), 1-6.
Kuppelwieser, V.G. and Klaus, P. (2021), “Measuring customer experience quality: the EXQ
scale revisited”, Journal of Business Research, Vol 126, pp. 624-633.
Lemke, F., Clark, M. and Wilson, H. (2011), “Customer experience quality: an exploration in
business and consumer contexts using repertory grid technique”, Journal of the Academy of
Marketing Science, Vol. 39 No. 6, pp. 846-869.
Lemon, K.N. and Verhoef, P.C. (2016), “Understanding customer experience throughout the
customer journey”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 80 No. 6, pp. 69-96.
Lipkin, M. M. L. (2016). Customer experience formation in today's service landscape. Journal of
Service Management, 27(5), 678-703.
McColl-Kennedy, J.R., Gustafsson, A., Jaakkola, E., Klaus, P., Radnor, Z., Perks, H. and
Friman, M. (2015), “Fresh perspectives on customer experience”, Journal of Services Marketing,
Vol. 29 No. 6/7, pp. 430-435.
Meyer, C. and Schwager, A. (2007), “Understanding customer experience”, Harvard business
review, Vol. 85 No. 2, pp. 1-11.
Pauwels, K. and Neslin, S.A. (2015), “Building with bricks and mortar: the revenue impact of
opening physical stores in a multichannel environment”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 91 No. 2, pp.
182-197.
Petermans, A., Janssens, W., & Van Cleempoel, K. (2013). A holistic framework for
conceptualizing customer experiences in retail environments. International Journal of Design,
7(2), 1-18.

16
Pine II, B.J. and Gilmore, J.H. (1998), “Welcome to the experience economy”, Harvard Business
Review, Vol. 76 No. 4, pp. 97-105.
Pomerantz, A. (1984), “Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: some features of
preferred/dispreferred turn shapes”, Atkinson, M. and Heritage, J. (Ed.s), Structures of Social
Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 57-101.
Rosenbaum, M.S., Seger-Guttmann, T. and Giraldo, M. (2017), “Commentary: vulnerable
consumers in service settings”, Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 31 No. 4/5, pp. 309-312.
Rosenbaum, M.S. and Russell-Bennett, R. (2019), “Developing substantive theories into formal
theories via disruption”, Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 33 No. 5, pp. 572-575.
Roy, S. (2018), “Effects of customer experience across service types, customer types and time”,
Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 32 No. 4, pp. 400-413.
Schouten, J.W., McAlexander, J.H. and Koenig, H.F. (2007), “Transcendent customer
experience and brand community”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 33 No. 3,
pp. 357-368.
Shostack, G. L. (1977). Breaking free from product marketing. Journal of Marketing, 41(2), 73-
80.
Thaichon, P., Phau, I. and Weaven, S. (2020), “Moving from multi-channel to omni-channel
retailing: special issue introduction”, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 65,
102311.
Trischler, J., Zehrer, A. and Westman, J. (2018), “A designerly way of analyzing the customer
experience”, Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 23 No. 3, pp. 777-788.

17
Verhoef, P.C., Lemon, K.N., Parasuraman, A., Roggeveen, A., Tsiros, M. and Schlesinger, L.A.
(2009), “Customer experience creation: determinants, dynamics and management strategies”,
Journal of Retailing, Vol. 85 No. 1, pp. 31-41.
Wall, E.A. and Berry, L.L. (2007), “The combined effects of the physical environment and
employee behavior on customer perception of restaurant service quality”, Cornell Hotel and
Restaurant Administration Quarterly, Vol 48. No. 1, pp. 59-69.
Zaki, M. (2019), “Digital transformation: harnessing digital technologies for the next generation
of services”, Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 33, pp. 429-435.