65

2013

 ........

( ) (
)
( .

.

) (

( " "
" .
" "

.
: -

Abstract
The present study was conducted to find out the effect of available creative education
and the levels of creative methods knowledge for creative marketing climate factors for
efficacy of employees banks, and of extent creative marketing climate factors relating to
individual, procedures, and technology for customers satisfaction of bank services
quality, relating to tangibles, reliability, responsiveness, assurance and empathy in
increasing customer number, attaining loyalty and satisfaction in Iraqi Commercial
bank.
The study was conducted using two kinds of questionnaires; the first for bank
employees and, the second for customers of the bank.
The study shows that the significant effect of creative marketing climate factors have a
significant effect on. It also shows that there is significant effect for aggregate of
67

2013

creative marketing climate factors individual, procedures, technology, dimensions of

customer satisfaction of bank service quality tangibles, reliability responsiveness,
assurance, empathy, as customers see it. The results show a positive correlation and
significant effect of all creative marketing climate factors for the variable, customer
satisfaction of bank service quality. The study shows that there is an urgent need for
introducing creative marketing climate strategy to face the competitive environment.
The study recommends adopting training modes to improve the levels of knowledge
about methods of creative marketing strategies to improve service quality and customer
satisfaction.
Keywords: Creative Marketing Climate, Satisfaction of Bank Service Quality for
Commercial Bank Iraq.

" " .

) ).(2000

" "

.Corporate Image

)(Jamaah, Nadim Hafted (2003

Abu

 ........
.
) (.
.
.
.
.
.
.

:
.

.
.
.
.
.

)

( )
(.
)

(
)

(
)

(
)

(
)

(

Importance of the study

.
.
.

(.
. )
( .
69

2013

.
) (
.
Hypotheses of the study

:
First Principle Hypotheses :
:Ha
) (.
:
:Hal
)( .
:Ha2
)( .
:Ha3
)( .

Second Principle Hypotheses :

: Hb
.
:

: Hb1
) (
.

: Hb2
)( .

 ........

: Hb3
) (
.

: Hb4
)( .

: Hb5
)( .
Study Objectives

.
.
.
.
. ) (
.
. )
( .

Related Studies

)( Cutler, Philip, J. Gary (2003

Creative

Innovation

.


( Al-Seren,Raad Hassan( 2001 ):

= Innovation + Creative ) Business Investment (

71

2013

.


(Schemer horn J. R. & others (1994).
= Creative + Invention Application
(Nagem, Adulah(2007) R. g. Schroeder )(58
) (12 ) (7
Analysis

Business ) (3

.
:

( Doyle Peter

)(1998

:Importance .

:Unique .

:Continue in Distinction
.

:Marketing Ability

4ps

) ) (2004



) ).(2000
)(King, Nigel, nieal Anderson (2004 "
".
.

 ........

...



.

) ) (2003 ) )) (2004

) (2000
.
) )(2005 ))(2003
)
)( Lovelock(2001) (2001

.1 :

4ps

7ps ) ( Berry L., (1985

)
(
.

.2 ) (Parasuraman A., (1988

.

. - .

. ) )

((2004

:
. .
%85 .

73

%5

-75

2013

.
:
.
.3
.
.4
.5 :

) ( Piercy &Morgan, (1995

. .


.

.

.
). . (2001)



:
Servqual . - .

- .

) (Parasuraman A., 1988) (Berry L., 1985

 ........

.
) (1988 :
.
.

.

) )(2003
) (
.

) (Paswan, (2004

. )
( .
.

) ( .
: .
)

)(2007 )

( )
(

.
)(Paswan, (2004
:
.

75

2013

.


.

Methodology

-106

.
Sample

) (1
106 100 75 2013/2/10
2013/2/20

64

75

11

%85.3

%64

150

2013/2/10 2013/2/20

86.6% .

150

20 130

 ........
) ( 1 .

Commercial Banks

64
)AL-Rashid Bank (106

130

Methods of Data Collection

:
) (2

.

. ) (54
) (40 ) (13
)(8 )
( )(8 ) (
).(6-5

) ( liker

) (5

) (4 (3) (2)

) (1

. .
) (2
.

1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11

) (2

4 -1
)(5

8-5
)(5

8-1
)(6

)(13
8-1
Tangibles

16 - 9
Assurance

24 -17
Responsiveness

32 - 25
Reliability

40 - 33
Empathy

77

2013

Design of the Study

:

Independent variable Creative Climate:

: .

: )
(

- Variable

Dependent

Marketing

Creative :

Individual

procedures

Technology


.

 ........
)(1 1/

Dependent Variable

Independent variable

Elements of the Creative Marketing

Creative Climate

Brian Storming
Nominal Group Tech
Delphi Tech
Heuristic Ideation
Picture Stimulation
Six Thinking Hats
Rich Picture

Individual

procedures

Technology

Independent variable Marketing Creative

:

Individual .

procedures .

Technology .

Variable

Dependent

Customer Satisfaction Bank Services Quality :

Tangible
:
.

Assurance
.

Responsiveness .

Reliability ..
79

2013

Empathy .
)(2 2/

Independent variable

Elements of the Creative Marketing

Individual

procedures

Technology

Dependent Variable

Customer Satisfaction Bank Services Quality

Assurance

Responsiveness
Reliability

Empathy

Tangible

Tools of statistical Analysis

:
. Cornbach Alpha .
. Standard Deviation & Arithmetic Means

.
. Linear Regression
.
. Multiple Regression

 ........

.
Results of the Study

) (3 ) (%60 (
) one-Sample T-Test )(3

)(3)) one-Sample T-Test

Sig.
)(T
Std.
%
Mean

value
Deviation

Hypothesis
Hypothesis

Accepted

Ha
0.005 1.786
1.007
% 64.8
3.240

subsidiary
Ha1
0.000 1.854
0.742
%72.74
3.637

subsidiary
Ha2
0.003 1.786
1.062
56.70
2.835

2.110

1.112

42.20

1.854

0.007

Ha3

)(4 ) ( one-Sample T-Test

-

) (3


) ( ) ( 3.24
) ( % 64.64
) (% 60 )
(
) ( ) ( 2.11 2.83
) (% 42.2 % 56.6 ) (
81

2013

) ( 1.122 -1.132

) ( 3.64
) ( % 72.8 ) (0.672

.
)(4) ( one-Sample T-Test

Sig.
)(T

(T) value

Hypothesis
Hypothesis
Std.

Mean
Accepted
Deviation

4.12

82.4

0.829

1.874

0.004

4.36

87.2

0.797

1.786

0.000

4.22

84.4

0.800

1.854

0.003

3.78

75.6

0.652

1.872

0.007

4.16

83.2

0.903

1.695

0.005

4.13

82.3

0.785

1.873

0.001

Ha

subsidiary
Ha1

subsidiary
Ha2

subsidiary
Ha3

subsidiary
Ha4

subsidiary
Ha5

subsidiary

) ( 4
) ( 4.13 ) (% 82.6
) (% 60

) (0.785 .
) (4.36 ) (% 87.2

) ( ) ( 4.12 4.16 4.22 ) 82.4% 83.2% 84.4

 ........
(% .

.
) ( 3.78 ) (% 75.6

.
Hypothesis Testing

Results of First Principal Hypothesis

: Ha
) ( ) ( 7

) (
) (2.87 ) ( % 57.40

.. )

( 3

) ( 0.02
) ( 0.0 5 ) ( 1.113

) ( ) (
)( ) (2.84 )( ) (2.11

.
: Ha1
)( .

83

2013

) ( 5 )

(2

) ( 4.62 )

( % 92, 40

( 0.478

) ( 4 ) (2.56 )
(%51.20

) (1.005 .
) ( 5
) ( 3.637 ) (0.742
) ( 0.00
) ( % 5

( % 72.74
) ( 3 )


.
.
: Ha2
)( .
) ( 5 ) ( 6
) ( 3.75 ) 75,0
( % ) (0.976
.

 ........

) ( 5 ) )( 2 1(

Strongly Agree

Agree

Natural

Disagree

Strongly
Disagree

32
% 50

32
% 50

0.504 4.50

24
40
%37,5 %62,5

0.478 4.62

32
4
16
8
4
%50,0
%6,25 %25,0
%12,5 %6,25

0.934 2.87

8
24
24
4
4
%12,5 %37,5 %37,5 %6,25 %6,25

1.005 2.56

Arithmetic Mean

Standard Deviation

Question

1.023 3.637

4
28
12
20
0.976 3.75

%6,25 %43,75 %18,75 %31,25

32

4
4
12
12
1.403 2.25 %50,0

%6,25 %18,75 %18,75 %6,25


24
16
12
12
1.155 2.25

%37,5 %18,75 %25,0 %18,75

8
%12,5

16
%25,0

20
%31,25

12
%18,75

4
%6,25

1.178 3.09

) (

1.062 2.835

)
(

0.893 3.24

85

2013

) ( 8 7 ) (2.25
) (%45 ) (7

) (8
) ( 1.155 1.403

. ) ( 5

) ( 2.835
)

( 3

)(%56.70

) (1.062 ) ( 0.00
.(% 5

) ( 6

1
2
3
4

6
7
8

Question

Brain storming

Nominal
Group Tech
Delphi
Tech

Heuristic
Ideation

Picture
Stimulation

Six Thinking
Hats

Role Playing

Rich Picture

20
%31,25

20
%31,25

12
18,75

12
18,75

2.67

1.574

44
%68,75

8
%12,5

4
%6,25

8
%12,5

1.62

1.062

44
%68,75

8
%12,5

8
%12,5

4
%6,25

1.56

0.941

24
%37,5

20
%31,25

12
%18,75

8
%12,5

2.06

1.037

16
%25,0

2.0

0.713

8
%12,5

4
%6,25

8
%12,5

12
%18,75

2.37

1.628

8
%12,5

8
%12,5

24
%37,5

2.50

1.333

8
%12,5

12
12
%18,75 %18,75

2.06

1.207

2.11

1.122

16
%25,0
32
%50,0
24
%37,5
32
%50,0

32
%50,0

) (

 ........

)
(

2.75

1.008

: Ha3
)( .
) ( 6
) ( 2 Brain storming
) (2.67 ) (% 53, 4
) ( 1.574

. .

) ( 3 ) (1.56
) (%31, 2 Delphi Tech

) ( 0.941

) ( 6
) (2.11 ) ( 3
) ( %42.20 ) (1.122

) ( 0.00
) (% 5

.

) (
) ( 2.50 2.37 2.67

.

Results of second Principal Hypothesis

87

2013

) : ( Hb )(
.
) ( 7

(Technology,

) Procedures, Individual
Empathy, Reliability Responsiveness, Assurance Tangibles
.

R2 )

( 0.688

) ( 0.110

) .( 0.110 F ) ( 136.4
)

( 3.34 ) ( 0.00

) ( H ) (0.05
.
) (7
Sig.
F
B
R2
0.00
136.4
0.110
0.688
F 3.34 = 0.05
): (Hb1
.
)

( 4 -1 ) ( 5 ) ( 8 1

) ( 13 ) ( 8

) ( 0.05 ) (0.974 ) (0.948

)( 0.974 F )( 364.078 ) ( 3.84
) .( 0.00
)( 8

T
B

1.786
0.560

2.887 0.063
13.867 0.234

Sig.
0.000
0.005
0.000

 ........
Sig.

R = 0.974

F = 364.078
= 0.00
T 1.66 = 0.05

R2 = 0.948

(0.560) B
) ( 0.560

T ) ( 1.786

.( 0.00) Sig.
) ( 2.887 - 0.063 -

T )-

( 13.867 - 2.887

. ) (0.000 0.005

.
) (
) : (Hb2
.
) ( 9

R = 0.977

R2 = 0.955 F ) (425.323

) (1.66 ) (Sig. = 0.00

(0.781) B T ) ( 1.854

) (0.003

( 0.187 - 0.084 -) B

T )(18.239-6.310- . ) (0.000

89

2013

) ( 9

F = 425.323
Sig.

0.781
0.0840.187 -

T
1.854
6.310 18.239R = 0.977

Sig.
0.003
0.000
0.000
R2 = 0.955

= 0.000
T 1.66 = 0.05
) (
) : (Hb3
.
) ( 10 )
(

R = 0.910

R2 = 0.828 F ) (96.549
= (Sig.

) (1.66 ) 0.05

( 0.66) B T ) ( 1.872 ) (0.007

( 0.086 - 0.038 -) B
T )( 6.163 - 2.084 - . )

( 0.000 0.041

.
) ( 10

B
0.66
0.0380.086 -

T
1.872
2.0846.163 -

Sig.
0.007
0.041
0.000

 ........
R2 = 0.828

R = 0.910

F = 96.549
= Sig.
0.00
T 1.66 = 0.05
) (
) : (Hb4
.

) ( 11 )
( ) (

R = 0.518

R2 = 0.269 F ) (7.351
) (1.66 ) (Sig. = 0.00

(0.66) B T ) ( 1.695 (0.005) Sig.

( 0.027 -0.042 -) B T
)( 1.662 - 2.015 - . )

( 0.102 0.048

.
) ( 11

F = 7.351
= Sig.

T
B
1.695
0.66
2.015 0.042 1.662 0.027R = 0.518
0.000
T 1.66 = 0.05

Sig.
0.005
0.048
0.102
R2 = 0.269

) (
) :(Hb5
.
) ( 12 ) (

91

2013

= R

0.851 R2 = 0.724 F

) ( 12

T
B

1.801
0.38

3.790 0.057
7.036 0.082
R = 0.851
F = 52.593
= Sig.
0.000
T 1.66 = 0.05
) (52.593 ) (1.66 ) 0.00

Sig.
0.001
0.000
0.000
R2 = 0.724

= (Sig.

( 0.38) B T

) ( 1.801 (0.001) Sig.

( 0.082 - 0.057 -) B T )( 7.036 - 3.790 -
. ) (0.00

:
.1

) (
.2
) (

.
.3
) (

 ........

.
) ( Creative Department Creative teams
) (Idea Champion ). ( Managerial Champion
.4
) (
.

) (
.

.5

) (

) (Technology, Procedures, Individual

) (

( Empathy,

) Reliability Responsiveness, Assurance Tangibles

.
.
) (
.6
) ( Empathy, Reliability Responsiveness, Assurance Tangibles

) (

.7 )
(

) ( ) (

) (

93

2013

.8 " "
) ( )

( ) (
"

.

:
. " "

. "
"
" ".
.


.

.
.
.

.
.

.
.

 ........
.
.

95

2013

....

)
(
....

) (13

24
25
26

30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40

27
28
29

19
20
21
22
23

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

 ........

)(2000 11-15
)(2004
.73-47:(1) 24
) (2007
10.
)(2003 .39-4

)(2004 .160
) (2005
.120-101(1) 1
)(2000
. 227
)(2004
.15 1
)(2003
92 .108-77

) (2001 .
.17:
)(2001 . 1 .80
) (2003
.128(1) 30 .
) (2001
.53-33 (2) 3 .
) " ( 2007 " .67
) (2003 .

213
Armstrong G. & Kotler P. (2005) Marketing in Introduction, Prentice Hall.
New Jersey, 575.
Anderson, EX. Rust (2004) Customer Satisfaction and Shareholder Value,
Journal of Marketing 68.
Bennington, L. & J. Cummane (1998) Measuring Service Quality; a Hydrib
Methodology, Total Quality Management 9 (6), 395-405.
Berry L., (1985) Quality Count in Service Too. Business Horizons, May -June.
97

2013

Booms, H. & M. Binter (1981) Marketing Strategies and Organization Structure

For service Firm. American Marketing Association.
Cowell, D. (1984) the Marketing of Service. Heinemann Professional Ltd.
Cronin, J. J. Taylor (1992) Measuring Service Quality: A Re Examination and
Extension, journal of Marketing 56 (July), 55-68.
Cutler, Philip, J. Gary (2003) Marketing, Goods and prices.
Translate by mazen Al-Manaa T.1. Damascus 84.
Commercial Banks, J. J. Apple. Sic.: Humanities 10 (1): 99-124.
Doyle Peter (1998) Marketing Management and Strategy, Prentice- Hall, 2nd
Edition, 199.
Gilbert, R. C. Voloutsou, C. Good & L. Moutinho (2004) Measuring Customer
Satisfaction in the fast food Industry: A Cross-National Approach.
Journal of Services Marketing 18 (5), 371-383.
King, Nigel, nieal Anderson (2004) Management of Change and creative
Activities, Guide Critical for Organization, Translate Mohammed
Hansen, Dar-Al mareg 22.
Keiningham, T. T. munn & Edtrin (2005) Dose Satisfaction Lead to
Profitability? And Customer Satisfaction: Evaluating the
Role of Culture, Journal of International Marketing 12 (3), 58-85.
Lovelock, C. (2001) Services Marketing. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Parasuraman A., (1988) Servqual; a Multiple-Item Scale for Measuring
Consumer Perceptions of service Quality; Journal of Retailing (64)1. Spring
12-40.
Parasutaman, A. v. Berry & L. Leonard (1988) A Multiple-Item Scale for
Measuring Consumer Perception of Service Quality, Journal of
Retailing 64 (1), 12-40.
Paswan A. K. Spears N. Hasty R. and Ganesh G. (2004) Search Quality in
Financial Service Industry: A contingency Perspective, Journal of
Service Marketing, 18 (5) 324-338.
Peter J. Paoznanski, (1997) using Structural Equation modeling to investigate
The causal ordering of job satisfaction and Organizational Commitment
Among Stuff Accountants. Behavioral Research in Accounting.
Rafiq, M. & Pervais (1995) Using 7ps as a Generic Marketing Mix: An
Exploratory Survey of UK and European Marketing Academic,
Marketing Intelligence and planning 13 (9), 4-15.
Piercy, N. & N. Morgan (1995) Customer Satisfaction Measurement and
Management: A procession Analysis, Journal of Marketing Management
817-834.
Robinson, S. (1999) Measuring Service Quality, Marketing Intelligence and
Planning 17 (1), 21-32.
Schemer horn J. R. &others (1994) Managing Organizational Behavior the Ed,
Jomwiley and INS, Inc, 666.
Sesser E. reached (1976) selling Gobs in the Service sector.
Business Horizons, (19), 65

 ........

99