See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/232901709

E-service quality and Web 2.0: Expanding quality models to include customer
participation and inter-customer support

Article in The Service Industries Journal · October 2009

DOI: 10.1080/02642060903026239

CITATIONS READS

132 763

1 author:

Marianna Sigala
University of Piraeus
290 PUBLICATIONS 11,613 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Smart tourism View project

Collaborative Information Seeking and Tourism View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Marianna Sigala on 01 December 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

This article was downloaded by: [HEAL-Link Consortium]
On: 23 September 2009
Access details: Access Details: [subscription number 786636646]
Publisher Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,
37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

The Service Industries Journal

Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t713636505

E-service quality and Web 2.0: expanding quality models to include customer
participation and inter-customer support
Marianna Sigala a
a
Department of Business Administration, University of the Aegean, Chios, Greece

First Published on: 28 July 2009

To cite this Article Sigala, Marianna(2009)'E-service quality and Web 2.0: expanding quality models to include customer participation
and inter-customer support',The Service Industries Journal,29:10,
To link to this Article: DOI: 10.1080/02642060903026239
URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02642060903026239

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf

This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or
systematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or
distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.

The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents
will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses
should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss,
actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly
or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.
 The Service Industries Journal
2009, iFirst Article, 1 – 18

E-service quality and Web 2.0: expanding quality models to include

customer participation and inter-customer support
Marianna Sigala

Department of Business Administration, University of the Aegean, Chios, Greece

(Received 1 May 2009; final version received 2 May 2009)

Web 2.0 empowers online customers and social networks to engage in e-service processes
such as service design, production and marketing. Although the impact of customer
participation and inter-customer support on service quality is recognised, e-service
quality conceptualisations and measurement models have failed to incorporate the
Downloaded By: [HEAL-Link Consortium] At: 06:45 23 September 2009

impact of Web 2.0 on e-service delivery. After examining the role of Web 2.0 on
customer participation and the gaps of previously developed e-service quality models,
an extended e-service quality model is proposed that considers customer participation
and inter-customer support in e-service settings. The theoretical and practical
implications of the proposed model for website design and management are discussed.

Keywords: Web 2.0; e-service quality models; (inter)customer support and

participation; travel sector

Introduction
Web 2.0 applications (such as wikis, blogs and social networks) significantly impact the
way e-services are provided and consumed on the Internet (Erat, Desouza, Schafer-
Jugel, & Kurzawa, 2006). Customers expect to become active firms’ partners for designing
and consuming their personalised hotel room or travel experience, while by participating
in social networks (e.g. www.tripadvisor.com, www.flickr.com), customers also generate
value and services for and from each other (Lin & Huang, 2006; Sigala, 2008a). Conse-
quently, many firms adapt their e-business models in order to empower online consumers
and enable them to participate more actively in their value chain operations. For example,
Sheraton’s website is redesigned as a social network (entitled the Belong Starwood
website) enabling multiple forms of e-communications such as customer-to-customer
(C2C), customer-to-business. For example, Sheraton’s guests are invited to upload and
share online their vacation videos and stories so that others looking for a Starwood
hotel can read this user-generated content and use it as a customer support service and
as advice on how to select and evaluate different hotel options. On Starwood’s 2.0
website, keywords-tags are used for categorising online guests’ stories and presenting
them in the form of a ‘tag cloud’ and ‘top vacation ideas’, which in turn facilitate travellers
in their information search and decision making process. Another exemplar and recent
case of Web 2.0 exploitation for empowering and engaging customers into service
processes is Obama’s campaign that capitalised on Web 2.0 tools (such as social network-
ing and viral videos) for mobilising and empowering voters for fundraising, political
marketing and voter registration (e.g. http://my.barackobama.com).


Email: m.sigala@aegean.gr

ISSN 0264-2069 print/ISSN 1743-9507 online

# 2009 Taylor & Francis
DOI: 10.1080/02642060903026239
http://www.informaworld.com
 2 M. Sigala

Hence, in Web 2.0-enabled websites, the service creation and provision as well as the gen-
eration of customer value and communication go beyond the dyadic interaction between the
customer and the firm and expand to include customer networks and their C2C communi-
cation. There are two major features of Web 2.0 that empower users to mass collaborate,
mass communicate and build communities (Sigala, 2008a, 2008b): the networking and con-
nectivity capabilities (such as tagging, track backs, real simple syndication (RSS), etc.) and
the social intelligence and collective knowledge created through the user-generated content.
However, despite the growing participation of customers in e-services’ production and
provision, previous research on e-service quality primarily focuses on the interaction
between the consumer and the website (Donthu & Yoo, 1998; Lociacono, Watson, &
Goodhue, 2000; Yang, Peterson, & Huang, 2001; Yoo & Donthu, 2001). Thus, previous
studies on e-service quality provide an adequate framework for measuring the interactivity
and the service provision created by websites, but they have failed to recognise that e-
service quality is more than just how a consumer interacts with a website. Because in
Web 2.0-enabled websites, e-service is also provided by customers and their social net-
Downloaded By: [HEAL-Link Consortium] At: 06:45 23 September 2009

works, the e-service quality constructs should also measure and reflect the increasing cus-
tomer participation and the impact of C2C interactions on the quality of e-service
provision (Sigala & Sakellaridis, 2004).
Similarly, research about offline service provision and service quality also mainly
focuses on the dyadic interactions between service providers and customers (e.g. Goodwin
& Gremler, 1996; Gremler & Gwinner, 2000; Gwinner, Gremler, & Bitner, 1998; Price &
Arnould, 1999), ignoring the role and the impact (positive and/or negative) of customer par-
ticipation and inter-customer support on service production, delivery and quality. Few
studies (e.g. Kelley, Donnelly, & Skinner, 1990; Rosenbaum & Massiah, 2007) have recog-
nised the impact of customer participation on service quality. However, the majority of these
studies focus mainly on examining the antecedents, the motivations and the organisational–
customer benefits of customer volunteer performance (e.g. Bendapudi & Leone, 2003;
Eriksson, Fjeldstad, & Sasson, 2007; Junquera, del Brı́o, & Fernández, 2008; Moeller,
2008) and of consumer communities (e.g. Rosenbaum, 2008) on the delivery of services,
while on the other hand, they have ignored to investigate the impact and the inclusion of
customer volunteer performance and consumer communities on service quality models.
This study addresses these gaps by expanding the traditional models of e-service
quality to incorporate the impact of customer participation and inter-customer support
within online consumer communities. This study is of high importance and urgency, as
current e-business trends require firms wishing to compete on e-service quality to
extend their view of productive resources beyond their traditional boundaries in order
to include customers and social networks as potential firms’ partners (Bettencourt,
1997; Junquera et al., 2008; Sigala, 2008b). To develop a fresh approach to e-service
quality conceptualisation, this study reviews and uses a wide range of literature from
different fields. The study first reviews recently published studies demonstrating and
examining how the use of Web 2.0 enables customers and social networks to participate
and impact on e-service provision, delivery and consumption. Constructs for expanding
the e-service quality models are also identified by reviewing studies examining the role
of customer participation and inter-customer support in offline service settings. Moreover,
different models and studies measuring e-service quality are critically reviewed for
identifying their gaps, and then, an enhanced e-service quality model is developed that
compiles and synthesises all previous arguments about online customer participation
and inter-customer support in e-service quality. Finally, the business and theoretical
implications of the proposed model are provided.
 The Service Industries Journal 3

Web 2.0 and customer participation in e-services: impact on value creation,

inter-customer (C2C) support and e-service quality
Web 2.0 tools afford the creation of computer-mediated social networking and Internet
users’ collaboration. Hence, a first attempt to examine the role of Web 2.0 in, and its
impact on, enhancing the role of customers in e-service provision can be based on the
literature studying the benefits of online communities for generating customer value and
benefits. A number of studies (e.g. Andersen, 2005; Wang & Fesenmaier, 2004) provided
evidence that online communities provide customer value by generating users with all
types of relational benefits, namely functional, social, hedonic and psychological
(Gwinner et al., 1998). Such community benefits are important so that customers can
take easier, faster and more reliable purchase decisions when purchasing online. Indeed,
Sigala and Sakellaridis (2004) provided evidence that website features promoting
community building are important determinants of e-service quality. This is because
online communities possess and develop features (such as quality and credibility of
information, service quality, member interaction and leadership, brand reputation and
Downloaded By: [HEAL-Link Consortium] At: 06:45 23 September 2009

(intrinsic and extrinsic) rewards for members’ activities) that in turn help customers in
their online purchase process by (Jang, Ko, & Koh, 2007): identifying a product service
to satisfy their need; evaluating alternatives; helping others and getting emotional
satisfaction. Schwabe and Prestipino (2005) showed that by consulting online commu-
nities, travellers can gather more and better quality of travel information in terms of
information timeliness, completeness, structure and personalisation (Rittberger, 2000).
Sigala (2008a) demonstrated how Web 2.0-enabled websites allow firms to gather custo-
mer intelligence and use it for providing enhanced customer service in the form of
provision of personalised information support; cross-selling and up-selling based on
collaborative filtering; C2C communications and social networks for exchanging and
sharing travel experiences and advice; and customer complaint management.
In examining different types of communities of practice (e.g. B2C, C2C, internal and
external to the firm), Erat et al. (2006) discussed their use for acquiring and sharing
customer knowledge that firms can later use for improving service processes and
performance. Rowley, Teahan and Leeming (2007) stressed the use of online commu-
nities for co-operating with customers (individually or within communities) and facilitat-
ing new service development (NSD) and innovation processes. Pitta and Fowler (2005)
and Lagrosen (2005) reviewed a plethora of studies reflecting the increasing interest
towards the integration and engagement of customers and online communities in new
product development (NPD) and innovation. Overall, Web 2.0 tools enable firms not
only to learn about customers, but also to learn and improve service processes with
the help of customers. To that end, Web 2.0 applications reflect a shift from ‘designing
service for customers’ to ‘designing with’ and ‘design by’ customers. Customer partici-
pation and customer (collective) knowledge were also found to enhance service quality
and firm performance when used in NSD (Sigala & Chalkiti, 2007), service design
and development (Cegarra, Juan, & Sánchez-Polo, 2008) and creating and managing
consumer communities (Eriksson et al., 2007).
But how do Web 2.0 tools enable the formation of online communities and the collec-
tion of customer intelligence, both which in turn enhance e-service quality and e-service
provision? The following section reviews recent studies providing practical evidence and
theoretical underpinning of the capabilities of Web 2.0 to establish and maintain online
customer communities. Lin and Huang (2006) provided evidence of the blogs’ capabilities
to build a travel community of interest by assembling and networking Internet users for
 4 M. Sigala

collecting, exchanging and providing travel information and support. Ying and Davis
(2007) and Lento, Welser, Gu and Smith (2006) illustrated how blogs create and maintain
strong online communities through their social ties tools namely blogrolls, permalinks,
comments and trackbacks. Pan and Millen (2008) showed how social booking creates
social interaction and communities of knowledge exchanges by leveraging the capabilities
of social tagging. Warmbrodt, Sheng and Hall (2008) studied the creation of vlogger’s
communities that are based on vloggers’ interactions that satisfy social needs, such as
being connected, finding validation for one’s experience and ideas, and being producer
and consumer. Indeed, the social bonds and structures created within the blogsphere
are increasingly being measured (e.g. Lin, Sundaram, Chi, Tatemura, & Tseng, 2006;
Warmbrodt et al., 2008; Ying & Davis, 2007) by applying social network analysis. In
other words, it is easy to investigate the role of Web 2.0 tools in establishing social net-
works, empowering customers and making them electronic co-marketers who provide
other customers with marketing information, several benefits of functional and social
support as well as advice and guide them on their online purchases.
Downloaded By: [HEAL-Link Consortium] At: 06:45 23 September 2009

The customers’ value generated to the firm by using Web 2.0 applications is also
widely advocated in the literature. Damianos, Cuomo, Griffith, Hirst and Smallwood
(2007) advocated that social bookmarking generates social influence and bonds through
resource management, information sharing and discovery, expert finding and social net-
working. Apart from the ability of social bookmarking to develop social communities,
social bookmarking was also found to create customer value and provide online customer
service by providing customer teams with a place to share resources; forming and
supporting social networks around interest areas and feeding expertise finding and user
profiling. Awad and Zhang (2007) discussed the informational benefits and support that
customers receive through the electronic word-of-mouth generated in online review
communities (e.g. www.tripadvisor.com, www.igougo.com). In examining the communi-
cation tools and social cues of myspace.com, Dwyer (2007) demonstrated the impact of
social networking sites on developing customer interrelations and communities. Li and
Stromberg (2007) illustrated that firms should exploit the social networking and communi-
cation capabilities of blogs for achieving benefits such as greater brand visibility and
perception; search engine optimisation; electronic word-of-mouth; instantaneous consu-
mer feedback; market research and insight; increased sales efficiency and reduced
impact from negative user-generated content. When measuring the e-service role of
videos tags on Del.ici.ous, Paolillo and Penumarthy (2007) found that social tagging
can generate to online customers community benefits such as easy retrieval (as users
use words they remember and have useful meaning to them); contribution and sharing;
attraction of attention; playfulness; opinion expression and self-presentation. Thus,
tagging can be used for providing online consumers with functional services and instru-
mental support; electronic word-of-mouth and informational services; development and
maintenance of social ties; C2C communication and support in an online community;
and collection, quick searching and sharing of data about market research on other
users’ opinions and interests.
Overall, Forrester Research (2006) provided several examples illustrating the capacity
of Web 2.0 to engage customers and their communities in all various business processes
with the aim to enhance processes’ efficiency, effective provision and delivery through
the generation of different values such as customer service (e.g. community self-service
savings); sales (e.g. community loyalty and sales reduces commissions and price
competitions); marketing (e.g. credibility of electronic word-of-mouth); production and
service delivery (e.g. co-design reduces waste) and research and development (e.g. input
 The Service Industries Journal 5

and participation of customers communities raise success rate of NPD and innovation). In
other words, Web 2.0 tools enable online consumers to become co-marketers, co-producers
and co-designers of their service experiences by providing them a wide spectrum of values.
Table 1 provides examples of firms exploiting Web 2.0 tools for transforming customers
from passive recipients of customised products to active co-creators and co-marketers of
service experiences in the travel sector. The taxonomy is based on Gibbert, Leibold and
Probst’s (2002) styles of customer knowledge exploitation, which explain the provision
of customer value by engaging customers and exploiting customer intelligence into
value chain operations.

Table 1. Examples of Web 2.0-enabled customer and online communities’ participation in service
design and delivery based on the five styles of customer knowledge management.
Customer
Downloaded By: [HEAL-Link Consortium] At: 06:45 23 September 2009

knowledge Business cases exploiting Web 2.0 for

management style Examples customer knowledge management
Prosumerism Creation and sharing of travel www.youtube.com, www.tripadvisor.com
videos, reviews, etc.
Team-based co- Collaborative creation of travel www.wikitravel.org (a collaborative travel
learning guides between travellers guide) travellers and (cultural)
and firms associations become partners of LA for
providing informational services and
support to others at www.experiencela.
com/About/xlapartner.htm.
Collaborative learning and design of
virtual cultural spaces (http://
ancientspaceswikis.arts.ubc.ca/ancient_
spaces/index.php?title=Egypt)
Mutual innovation Firms and customers The Aloft virtual hotel designed by second
collaborate for service life users in www.secondlife.com
design and delivery (http://www.virtualaloft.com/) and
hotel concept of which was later also
implemented in real life by Starwood
(http://www.starwoodhotels.com/
alofthotels/index.html) www.
traveltogether.com (groups of
customers collaborate for designing a
travel package)
Communities of Social networking websites and Yahoo ‘trip planner’, Sheraton’s Belong
creation blogs website, Lufthansa’s www.jetfriends.
com, www.carnivalconnections.com
(Carnival Cruises social networking
website for collaborative design of
cruise experiences); wikies developed
by the National Library of Australia for
collaborative developing and
interpreting the history of Australia
through the sharing of photos (https://
wiki.nla.gov.au/display/TPAD/Home,
http://www.pictureaustralia.org/) and
dancing material (http://www.
australiadancing.org/)

(Continued)
 6 M. Sigala

Table 1. Continued.
Customer
knowledge
management style Examples
Joint intellectual Mash-up models that enable the
property combination of resources
and information from
different websites – partners
for developing new business
and new services. Or, in
general: open-source
communities (of knowledge
and/or software) sharing
their API (application
programme interface) and/or
using Creative Commons
(www.creativecommons.
Downloaded By: [HEAL-Link Consortium] At: 06:45 23 September 2009
Business cases exploiting Web 2.0 for
customer knowledge management
www.earthbooker.com (assembly of
services from Google Earth and www.
hotels.com for enabling customers to
search and book a hotel based on its
location and view). http://www.
mapdango.com/: a map-enabled mash-
up that combines content from
Wikipedia, Flickr, WeatherBug,
Eventful.com and more to provide a
one-stop shop for exploring locations
around the world and showing cultural
events in the selected location alongside
other points of interest. http://www.

org) copy right agreements opengeospatial.org/ is an example of a

for enabling and fostering the peer-to-peer community enabling the
development of joint sharing of geographical knowledge and
intellectual projects software for enabling the joint
development of new projects

Customer participation in services: extension requirements for offline and online

service quality models
Customers’ participation in service provision and delivery has been long recognised.
Customers have been regarded as partial employees (Lovelock & Young, 1979; Mills,
1983) and their efforts, information provision and behaviour crucially impact the
quality of service provision. Bettencourt (1997) defined customers’ helpful discretionary
behaviours that support the ability of the firm to deliver service quality as customer
voluntary performance (CVP). In providing CVP, customers engage in any of the three
following major activities (Bettencourt, 1997): (a) firm promotion such as word of
mouth and recommendations (as co-marketers); (b) provision of feedback, reviews and
suggestions for improvement and innovation (e.g. customer participation in service
design as an organisational consultant) and (c) showing courtesy to a firms’ employees
and customers (i.e. customers co-operation in service production as well as acting as
co-producers of services). One can easily identify the correlations between these three
types of CVP and the use of Web 2.0 for empowering customers’ participation and enhan-
cing e-service delivery. Thus, it can be argued that Web 2.0 enables customers to engage in
an electronic CVP that in turn facilitates firms to provide enhanced e-service provision.
Although customer involvement and influence on service provision have been recog-
nised, research on service quality has focused exclusively on the role of employees as well
as the dyadic relationship between customer and service provider for providing service
quality (Rosenbaum & Massiah, 2007). Kelley et al. (1990) have developed a conceptual
framework of service quality that explicitly considered the contribution of customers by
extending the technical and functional quality dimensions of employees provided to the
service encounters (Gronroos, 1983) to the contributions of customers provided to the
service encounters. In this vein, the conceptual service quality model proposed by
Kelley et al. (1990) included two additional constructs namely, customer technical and
customer functional quality, but the former has never been tested empirically. Customer
 The Service Industries Journal 7

technical quality consists of what a customer provides to the encounter (such as labour
and/or information, i.e. customer citizenship), whereas the functional quality considers
how the service customer behaves during service provision, i.e. the humanistic manner
in which customers behave in consumption settings.
Another stream of literature highlights the role and the impact of C2C interactions on
service delivery and quality. Research shows that customers can receive functional and
social support in service encounters from firm employees (Kang & Ridgway, 1996),
friends shopping together (Clark & Martin, 1994; Hayko & Baker, 2004) and other unac-
quainted persons (McGrath & Otnes, 1995). Rosenbaum and Massiah (2007) reviewed
numerous studies examining the role and the impact of the three types of C2C interactions
in service encounters and settings: (a) interactions among unacquainted customers that can
assuage dissatisfied customers by lowering their anxiety associated with a service
exchange, having other customers (partial employees) facilitating the service process
and providing them with social interaction that alleviates boredom during their waiting
in queue (e.g. Arnould & Price, 1993; Guenzi & Pelloni, 2004; Harris & Baron, 2004);
Downloaded By: [HEAL-Link Consortium] At: 06:45 23 September 2009

(b) interactions in service settings among friends (e.g. purchase pals; Woodside &
Sims, 1976) that provide customers with hedonic pleasures and (c) customer interactions
with quasi-family members for fulfilling not only consumption needs but also companion-
ship and/or emotional support needs (Rosenbaum, 2006). In summary, Adelman, Ahuvia
and Goodwin (1994) developed the concept of inter-customer support to include three
forms of support that customers can obtain from interacting with other customers in
service encounters: (a) emotional support providing people with outlets for discussing
their feelings and expressing their concerns and worries (Fyrand, Moum, Finset, &
Glennas, 2002); (b) companionship offering people with a partner for activities (Helgeson,
2003) and (c) instrumental support providing customers with practical help, assistance
with mundane activities and/or financial aid. Later, Suurmeijer et al. (1995) merged com-
panionship and emotional support into a single dimension, namely socio-emotional
support. Recently, the benefits of consumer communities to both customers and firms
were validated by Rosenbaum (2008) who identified the following six types of social
support accruing to customers from communities (that in turn enhance customers’ well-
being, satisfaction and future intentions, and so firms’ performance evaluation): intimate
interaction, social participation, physical assistance, feedback, guidance and material aid.
This stream of studies is rooted in psychology research. However, Goodwin (1997) advo-
cated the application of communality (people’s meeting and access to communalities for
social interaction) to all service relations, and since then, the application of the social
support construct (initially developed by Barrera (1980) and used in psychology research)
for examining customer values from commercial service encounters and friendships has
boomed (e.g. Rosenbaum, 2008). Similarly, communality and social support constructs
can also be transferred to Web 2.0-enabled online communities and social networks, as
the analysis in the previous sections demonstrated that the C2C interactions and the social
knowledge (both generated and supported by web 2.0 tools) provide customers with inter-
customer support in the form of several types of socio-emotional and functional support.
Efforts have been taken to adapt service quality models for considering the impact of
inter-customer support on service encounters. Rosenbaum and Massiah (2007) expanded
the empathy dimension of the SERVQUAL scale (Parasuraman, Zeithaml, & Berry, 1988)
to customers because customers can display helping behaviours to the service establish-
ments, their employees and other customers. Indeed, customers extend empathy to other
customers because of customer altruism, social responsibility and an internalised ‘proso-
cial’ responsibility (e.g. George & Bettenhausen, 1990; Lee, Kang, Kee, & Park, 2005).
 8 M. Sigala

For example, customers may help other customers by recalling and utilising their previous
experiences and knowledge for assisting others in overcoming similar obstacles, such as
selecting an appropriate present. In this vein, when studying how customer behaviour
affects service delivery, Rosenbaum and Massiah (2007) validated the expansion of the
CVP concept to include an additional construct, namely customer care. The latter reflected
two customer behaviours that can positively affect service quality: (a) expression of C2C
empathy and (b) expression of a sense of personal responsibility to other customers. The
ability of Web 2.0-enabled service environments to generate and provide inter-customer
support is well analysed in the previous section.
Overall, this analysis demonstrates how service quality models based on the SERVQ-
UAL model are limited in considering the quality impacts of customer participation and
inter-customer support in service settings. SERVQUAL models have been conceptually
enhanced (but not always empirically validated) by including constructs such as the
CVP, the customer technical and functional quality (for addressing gaps related to custo-
mer participation), as well as by including constructs reflecting the socio-emotional and
Downloaded By: [HEAL-Link Consortium] At: 06:45 23 September 2009

instrumental support and customer value (for addressing gaps related to C2C interactions).
As Web 2.0-enabled service environments further empower and afford customer partici-
pation and inter-customer support, e-service quality models should urgently include the
impact of these two dimensions on service quality provision and delivery. However, as
the next section demonstrates, e-service quality models are limited to addressing the
latter issues and so appropriate expansions are proposed.

E-service quality: gaps and the proposed model

Zeithaml, Parasuraman and Malhotra (2000) defined e-service quality as the extent to which
a website facilitates efficient and effective shopping, purchase and delivery. In reviewing the
literature on e-service quality, Sigala and Sakellaridis (2004) concluded that research on
e-service quality has been mainly based on the SERVQUAL model and on efforts to
adapt its dimensions on Internet-based environments. Long and McMellon (2004) provided
evidence for the applicability of the SERVQUAL model on the Internet, but they have also
highlighted the need to adapt its dimensions in order to make it less reliant on interpersonal
interactions and more technologically relevant. As a result, a number of studies have also
adapted and included dimensions from the Information Systems (IS) field for developing
e-service quality models (Sigala, 2004). Table 2 summarises previous studies on e-service
quality by showing how these studies have adapted the dimensions of the SERVQUAL
model and of IS design research for measuring e-service quality.
However, as it was previously shown, SERVQUAL ignores the influence and the
quality impact of customer participation and inter-customer support on service provision.
Consequently, the consequential e-service quality models also fail to recognise these two
dimensions, although the latter are becoming critically important due to the increasing use
of Web 2.0 tools in the design of e-service settings. Indeed, it is clear that e-service quality
models (Table 2) include constructs reflecting either the quality of interaction between
customers and the website, or the website’s integration with other business systems. In
other words, current e-service quality models ignore the impact of C2C interactions and
customer participation on e-service provision and e-service quality. In this vein, service
quality dimensions such as empathy, courtesy, friendliness, care and helpfulness are
also not included in the e-service models presented in Table 2.
In reviewing research in e-service quality, Collier and Bienstock (2006) highlighted
the need to distinguish the dimensions of e-service quality models between two major
 The Service Industries Journal 9

Table 2. E-service quality models (mainly based on SERVQUAL and/or IS design).

Author Model Definition
Voss (2000) Based on the SERVQUAL Responsiveness: reflected not only on e-mail
model response times but also on website
customisation and the provision of proactive
online service. Reliability: the ability to
connect to the Internet, download time,
systems not crashing and order fulfilment.
Assurance referring to the ability to convey
trust and confidence. Tangibles: website
features such as video, animation, sound,
simulations and other multimedia features
enhance the tangibility. Lack of empathy
online. Provision of online assurance
becomes quite difficult
Cox and Dale (2001) Based on the SERVQUAL The lack of online human interaction means
Downloaded By: [HEAL-Link Consortium] At: 06:45 23 September 2009

model that determinants such as competence,

courtesy, cleanliness, comfort and
friendliness, helpfulness, care, commitment
and flexibility are not particular relevant in
e-commerce, but determinants such as
accessibility, communication, credibility,
understanding, appearance, availability,
integrity and trustfulness are equally
applicable to e-commerce as in physical
services
Yang and Jun (2002) Based on the SERVQUAL They examined perceptions of service quality
model by sampling both Internet purchasers and
non-purchasers. They found that six service
quality dimensions were perceived by
Internet purchasers: reliability, access, ease
of use, personalisation, security and
credibility. However, seven dimensions
were present for the non-users. Unique to
non-purchasers were the dimensions of
responsiveness and availability, while the
credibility dimension did not come up
Barnes, Liu, and WebQual adaptation of Include information quality, website
Vidgen (2001) SERVQUAL navigation/appearance, user empathy/
mobility
Madu and Madu Based on dimensions of Performance (ease of navigation and
(2002) SERVQUAL and IS information quality); website features (e.g.
design search engine); structure (e.g. hyperlinks);
aesthetics (website appearance); reliability
(consistency of website functionality);
storage capability (ease of data retrieval);
serviceability (complaints handling/
solution); security, system integrity; trust for
data sharing; responsiveness (courtesy,
flexibility to respond to customer needs);
service quality differentiation and
customisation; web store policies;
reputation; assurance; empathy in elements
of human contact, e.g. e-mail

(Continued)
 10 M. Sigala

Table 2. Continued.
Author Model Definition
Zeithaml (2002) e-SQ that is based on the e-SQ has seven dimensions that form two
SERVQUAL model scales: a core e-SQ scale including
efficiency (ability, easiness to get to and
navigate a website), fulfilment (having
products in stock and delivering them on
time), reliability (technical functioning of a
website) and privacy (assurance regarding
data sharing and security); a recovery e-SQ
scale including responsiveness (provide
appropriate data when problems occur,
online guarantees and mechanisms for
handling returns), compensation and contact
(speak to service agent)
Yoo and Donthu SITEQUAL based on IS Nine-item scale with four dimensions: ease of
(2001) use, aesthetic design, processing speed and
Downloaded By: [HEAL-Link Consortium] At: 06:45 23 September 2009

security
Loiacono, Watson, WEBQUAL model based The WEBQUAL consists of 12 dimensions: (1)
and Goodhue, on IS design information fits to task: the extent to which
(2002) website information is accurate, updated and
appropriate; (2) interactivity: consumers’
ability to interact with website and to receive
tailored/personalised information/service;
(3) trust: online security, information
privacy; (4) responsiveness: website
downloading and interaction time; (5)
design: aesthetics and navigation; (6)
intuitiveness: ease of website use/
interaction; (7) visual appeal; (8)
innovativeness: website uniqueness and
creativity; (9) website’s flow/emotional
appeal to online users; (10) integrated
communications: website integration with
other communication/marketing media; (11)
business processes: website integration with
other processes; (12) viable substitute:
website viability relative to other media
Li, Tan and Xie Based on SERVQUAL E-service quality including: tangibles,
(2002) dimensions reliability, responsiveness, integration of
communication, assurance, quality of
information and empathy

categories: (a) e-service quality constructs that refer to the interactive quality that takes
place between the consumer and the website (referred to as the process dimension) includ-
ing the website’s ease of use, privacy, website design, information accuracy and website
functionality and (b) e-service quality constructs reflecting the outcome of the e-service
offerings (including order accuracy, order condition and order timeliness). The empirically
validated e-service quality model by Collier and Bienstock (2006) can be considered as a
summative model of all previous e-service models and a holistic one for managing and
measuring e-service quality because it illustrates: (a) how e-service quality can be
designed and delivered (the process dimension) and (b) the quality outcomes of effectively
designed e-service settings. Nevertheless, because it is built on the inherited limitations of
e-service models that were previously discussed, the e-service quality conceptualisation
 The Service Industries Journal 11

and model by Collier and Bienstock (2006) ignores: (a) the customer participation and the
inter-customer support on e-service settings and (b) the impact of these two factors on cus-
tomers’ and firms’ outcomes. Figure 1 illustrates the proposed e-service quality model 2.0
that overcomes these two limitations.
Collier and Bienstock (2006) tested the impact of e-service processes on the output
quality directed to the service itself and its firm (which was measured in terms of the be-
havioural intentions of customers, such as loyalty, referrals, word of mouth, repurchase).
However, recent research in the field of the service-centred paradigm (e.g. Vargo &
Lusch, 2004) provides evidence that customers participate and pay for service experiences
in order to also enhance their well-being and satisfy higher-order needs. Research in social
support (see review by Cohen, 2004) also demonstrated that the quality, the reciprocity and
the amount of inter-customer social support are related with less stress, anxiety, depression,
group cohesion and, in general, with human health and well-being (and hence, the relation
E in Figure 1) as well as with service firms’ benefits such as customer satisfaction, positive
intentional behaviours and ability to charge higher prices (Rosenbaum, 2008). Similarly,
Downloaded By: [HEAL-Link Consortium] At: 06:45 23 September 2009

research in e-service has shown that users participate in online communities and social
networks with the aim and the expectation of satisfying higher-order needs. For
example, Langerak, Verhoef, Verlegh and Valck (2004) showed empirically that satisfac-
tion with member-to-member interactions is a significant driver of participation in the
virtual communities. Hagel and Armstrong (1997) distinguished four needs that virtual
communities need to satisfy: need for transaction, need of interest, need of fantasy and
need for relationship. Kollock (1999) identified anticipated reciprocity, increased recog-
nition and sense of efficacy as the major determining motivators for participation in virtual
communities. Krasnova, Hildebrand, Günther, Kovrigin and Nowobilska (2008) showed
that members participate in social networks with the expectation of fulfilling the following
needs: belongingness, self-esteem, self-presentation, cognitive, self-actualisation and
altruistic needs as well as peer pressure. The same stream of research advocates the
impact of user needs’ satisfaction on his/her loyalty and behavioural intentions on the

Figure 1. The e-service quality 2.0 model (an expansion of Collier and Bienstock’s (2006) model
distinguishing between process and outputs of e-service quality).
 12 M. Sigala

online community and website. In summary, several streams of research have indicated
that the outcomes of customer (and of customers’ communities) participation in e-
service processes need to be expanded in order to consider outputs that are not only directed
at the firms, but to also consider outputs that are directed at the customer, reflecting custo-
mer value gained from needs’ satisfaction and through user participation in e-service pro-
duction – delivery. In this vein, the e-service quality outputs include two types of outputs
(Figure 1): (a) those directed at customers and (b) those directed at the service firm.
However, as previously shown, customers and social networks critically impact
e-service quality provision by taking active service roles as partial employees in Web
2.0-enabled services. Hence, the process dimension of e-service delivery is extended
to include two more dimensions (Figure 1): (a) electronic CVP and (b) inter-customer
support of social networks and online communities. For measuring electronic CVP, research
in the field of customer participation in mass customisation, marketing and NPD (e.g. see
review by Sigala (2006, 2008a, 2008b)) has shown that increasing customer involvement
leads to benefits such as increased customers’ control and flexibility in e-service processes,
Downloaded By: [HEAL-Link Consortium] At: 06:45 23 September 2009

better and personalised services (relation A in Figure 1). Similar to previous studies, elec-
tronic CVP can also be operationalised by measuring the level (reflecting the number of
e-service processes, e.g. design, production, marketing, after-service support, complaint,
etc., in which customers participate) and the intensity (referring to the degree of user
involvement described as a continuum from passive customer listening to extremely
intense-active user participation) of customer involvement in e-service settings.
Previous analysis demonstrated that inter-customer support is mainly reflected in
the social support that customers gain from online communities and social networks.
Schwarzer (2008) developed and validated a holistic scale for measuring social support
that can also be adapted in e-service settings and that measures: (a) the three types –
informational, tangible and emotional (reflecting the functional and socio-emotional
support of online communities); (b) the sources (e.g. friends, firms, experts, marketers,
bloggers, etc.) and (c) the three dimensions (namely amount, satisfaction and reciprocity)
of social support. Rosenbaum and Massiah (2007) found that inter-customer support in the
form of socio-emotional and instrumental support are determinants of CVP and customer
care – empathy (hence the relations B and E in Figure 1).
However, research (e.g. Hinds & Lee, 2008; Jung, 2008) on IS design examining the
factors affecting the success of online communities and social networks has shown that the
following technological factors are required for assisting social interactions, facilitating a
sense of togetherness and members’ collaboration (and hence, the existence of a relation C
in Figure 1 between website features and inter-customer support): telepresence (awareness
of being there in the mediated environment) and social presence (the degree to which the
technology allows a user to build personal connection with others). Moreover, research in
the field of prosumerism and customer participation in mass customisation has shown that
toolkits and IS co-design systems that enable and support online communities (Franke &
Piller, 2003; von Hippel, 2001; Khalid & Helander, 2003; Piller, Schubert, Koch, &
Möslein, 2005) increase customer participation in e-service processes by generating cus-
tomer knowledge for pre-configuration; supporting collaborative co-design fostering in the
form of problem solving; building of trust and so reduction of perceived risk. Because of
the ability of online communities to foster and support customer participation in e-service
processes, the model hypothesises a relation D in Figure 1.
Based on this stream of research and because e-service settings need to be designed in
order to allow and support customer and communities participation in e-service processes,
it is argued that the process dimension of e-service quality referring to website interactivity
 The Service Industries Journal 13

has to be expanded in order to include the IS design dimensions that support telepresence
and social presence in e-service environments. To achieve the latter, the following
constructs (Hinds & Lee, 2008; Jung, 2008) need to be added in the operationalisation
of the quality of website interactivity so that the latter considers not only interactions
between the firm/website and the customer, but also the inter-customer interactions and
customer participation in a mediated e-service setting:
. the vividness of the website (i.e. the representational richness in terms of sensory
breadth and depth),
. the synchronicity,
. the closure and the bridging of (community) communications,
. the IS responsiveness for facilitating awareness of others’ existence.
Overall, when considering the additional dimensions of e-service quality that have been
added, it becomes evident that the conceptualisation e-service quality shifts from assessing
solely the quality of e-service processes to measuring the quality of the e-service setting and
Downloaded By: [HEAL-Link Consortium] At: 06:45 23 September 2009

of its IS features that would need to support and facilitate the participation and engagement
of the customer and of customer social networks in e-service design, production, delivery
and consumption. The e-service quality model contributes also to the literature by advocat-
ing the need to also measure and cater to the quality outputs directed at customers reflecting
values sought and expected when engaging in the co-production and co-consumption of
e-services. In other words, in order to enhance e-service quality, online firms should
significantly consider how to best design their websites for enabling customers and social
networks to get more effectively involved in their e-service processes. The e-service
quality 2.0 conceptualisation and model also contributes to the literature related to the
service-centred paradigm, as it provides firms with ideas on how to design e-service settings
and orchestrate service cues and resources for enabling customers to co-create unique
experiences. The following section provides some major business implications of the
proposed e-service quality 2.0 model for managing e-service quality.

Conclusions: theoretical and business implications of the e-service quality 2.0

model
The above-mentioned e-service quality 2.0 model represents a conceptual representation
of a new approach for defining the meaning of e-service quality. By reviewing related
literature, the model also identifies and suggests potential constructs for measuring and
operationalising its suggested dimensions. Consequently, further research is required for
validating and further refining the validity of this model. Future research is also suggested
to include a large-scale sample in order to test the applicability and the reliability of the
e-service quality 2.0 model in different cultures and contexts, since online customers’
characteristics and profiles may crucially impact their perceptions about their involvement
and role in e-service processes.
As online customers play an important role in determining e-service quality, firms
need to find ways of instilling and motivating positive customer behaviour, whereas
also managing and discouraging negative (dysfunctional) customer participation in their
e-service settings. Shaping customer behaviour is particularly important when C2C inter-
actions affect the cost and quality of service delivery. Given the crucial role of customers
in physical service settings, Kelley et al. (1990) proposed the use of a consumer
organisational socialisation process in the values, norms and expectations of the firm
that aims to manage the behaviour of customers in service encounters by developing
 14 M. Sigala

their skills, knowledge and attitudes. This consumer organisational socialisation process
may include formal organisational programs, organisational literature, environmental
cues, reinforcement, and observation of other customers.
Similarly, customer organisational socialisation processes can also be used by online
service firms. For example, customers of eBay.com essentially serve each other in ways
that the company merely facilitates. That is, eBay customers are both ‘sellers’ and
‘buyers’ of online auction goods. When sellers deliver poor quality or slow service to
buyers, eBay’s reputation is harmed. Instead of trying to resolve this problem through
expensive oversight, eBay devised a normative environment that keeps service quality
at a high level by making customers’ perceptions of their interactions with one another
a matter of public record. Similarly, Amazon customers voluntarily post reviews which
are viewed by prospective buyers who rate the reviews’ helpfulness. In both examples,
customers build reputations based on the feedback of other customers. Moreover, in
eBay, online users can evaluate the reviews and reliability of other users and such assess-
ments are visible to everyone. In the fear of losing face as well as of being banned from the
Downloaded By: [HEAL-Link Consortium] At: 06:45 23 September 2009

online community, online users avoid exchanging inaccurate or biased information and in
such a way, the service quality of the online community is self-controlled and monitored
through the power of the community. Whereas good reputations can translate into greater
sales for eBay customers, Amazon customers realise no economic benefit for their efforts,
only the intrinsic gratification and status they derive from being helpful. The customer-
review website www.igougo.com relies on the online community normative mechanisms
(e.g. evaluation of online members’ reviewers) for instilling positive online customer
behaviours and motivating members to contribute – share information online (e.g. travel
videos, photos) and write reviews, which in turn can help other websites users decide
and select a travel product. Moreover, www.igougo.com also employs instrumental con-
trols (in the form of points added to members’ corporate loyalty programme) to motivate
customer information sharing behaviour. Hence, each time an online member contributes
information, he/she collects points that can be later exchanged for free products.
Overall, e-service providers need to consider the use of both the normative controls
(that gain credibility from the collective norms of a larger group and reinforce that credi-
bility by building on the group’s ongoing experiences) and the instrumental controls
(i.e. specific tangible costs and rewards) for managing and instilling online customer
participation. However, because the impact of normative and instrumental controls on
inter-customer support and online customer participation can be moderated by factors
such as user personality, age, gender, culture and ethics, future research is required for
investigating the impact and use of such controls on the socialisation and behaviour of
online users.

References
Adelman, M.B., Ahuvia, A.C., & Goodwin, C. (1994). Beyond smiling: Social support and service
quality. In R. Rust & R. Oliver (Eds.), Service quality: New directions in theory and practice
(pp. 139–171). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Andersen, P.H. (2005). Relationship marketing and brand involvement of professionals through
web-enhanced brand communities: Coloplast case. Industrial Marketing Management,
34(3), 285–297.
Arnould, E.J., & Price, L.L. (1993). River magic: Extraordinary experience and the extended service
encounter. Journal of Consumer Research, 20(1), 24–45.
Awad, N.F., & Zhang, S. (2007, January 3–6). Stay out of my forum! Evaluating firm involvement in
online ratings communities. In The 40th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences
(HICSS), Hilton Waikoloa Village Resort Waikoloa, Big Island, Hawaii, USA.
 The Service Industries Journal 15

Barnes, S., Liu, K., & Vidgen, R. (2001, June 27–29). Evaluating WAP sites: The WebQual/m. In
The 9th European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS), Global Co-operation in the
New Millennium, Bled, Slovenia.
Barrera, M. (1980). A method for assessment of social support networks in community survey
research. Connections, 3, 8–13.
Bendapudi, N., & Leone, R. (2003). Psychological implications of customer participation in
co-production. Journal of Marketing, 67(1), 14–28.
Bettencourt, L. (1997). Customer voluntary performance: Customers as partners in service delivery.
Journal of Retailing, 73(3), 383–406.
Cegarra, N., Juan, G., & Sánchez-Polo, M.T. (2008). Defining the knowledge that an organisation
requires to create customer capital from a customer perspective. The Service Industries
Journal, 28(8), 1125–1140.
Clark, T., & Martin, C.L. (1994). Customer-to-customer: The forgotten relationship in relationship
marketing. In J.N. Sheth & A. Parvatiyar (Eds.), Relationship marketing: Theory, methods,
and applications (pp. 1–8). Atlanta, GA: Center for Relationship Marketing.
Cohen, S. (2004). Social relationships and health. American Psychologist, 59(November), 676–684.
Collier, J.E., & Bienstock, C. (2006). Measuring service quality in e-retailing. Journal of Service
Research, 8(3), 260–275.
Downloaded By: [HEAL-Link Consortium] At: 06:45 23 September 2009

Cox, J., & Dale, B. (2001). Service quality and e-commerce. Managing Service Quality, 11(2),
121–131.
Damianos, L., Cuomo, D., Griffith, J., Hirst, D., & Smallwood, J. (2007, January 3–6). Adoption,
utility, and social influences of social bookmarking. In The 40th Hawaii International
Conference on System Sciences (HICSS), Hilton Waikoloa Village Resort Waikoloa, Big
Island, Hawaii, USA.
Donthu, N., & Yoo, B. (1998). Cultural influences on service quality expectations. Journal of Service
Research, 1(2), 178–186.
Dwyer, C. (2007, January 3–6). Digital relationships in the ‘MySpace’ generation: Results from a
qualitative study. In The 40th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences
(HICSS), Hilton Waikoloa Village Resort Waikoloa, Big Island, Hawaii, USA.
Erat, P., Desouza, K., Schafer-Jugel, P., & Kurzawa, M. (2006). Business customer communities and
knowledge sharing: Studying the critical issues. European Journal of IS, 15(5), 511–524.
Eriksson, K., Fjeldstad, O.D., & Sasson, A. (2007). Knowledge of inter-customer relations as a
source of value creation and commitment in financial service firm’s intermediation. The
Service Industries Journal, 27(5), 563–582.
Forrester Research. (2006). Social computing. Retrieved September 14, 2007, from http://www.
forrester.com
Franke, N., & Piller, F. (2003). Key research issues in user interaction with user toolkits in a mass
customization system. International Journal of Technology Management, 26(5/6), 578–599.
Fyrand, L., Moum, T., Finset, A., & Glennas, A. (2002). The impact of disability and disease dur-
ation on social support of women with rheumatoid arthritis. Journal of Behavioural
Medicine, 25(3), 251–268.
George, J.M., & Bettenhausen, K. (1990). Understanding prosocial behavior, sales performance, and
turnover: A group-level analysis in a service context. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75(6),
698–709.
Gibbert, M., Leibold, M., & Probst, G. (2002). Five styles of customer knowledge management and
how smart companies use them to create value. European Management Journal, 20(5),
459–469.
Goodwin, C. (1997). Communality as a dimension of service relationships. Journal of Consumer
Psychology, 5(4), 387–415.
Goodwin, C., & Gremler, D.D. (1996). Friendship over the counter: How social aspects of service
encounters influence consumer service loyalty. In T.A. Swartz, D.E. Bowen, & S.W.
Brown (Eds.), Advances in services marketing and management research and practice
(Vol. 5, pp. 247–282). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Gremler, D.D., & Gwinner, K.P. (2000). Customer-employee rapport in service relationships.
Journal of Service Research, 3(1), 82–104.
Gronroos, C. (1983). Strategic management and marketing in the service sector (Report 83-104).
Cambridge, MA: Marketing Science Institute.
 16 M. Sigala

Guenzi, P., & Pelloni, O. (2004). The impact of interpersonal relationships on customer satisfaction
and loyalty to the service provider. International Journal of Service Management, 15(4),
365–384.
Gwinner, K.P., Gremler, D.D., & Bitner, M.J. (1998). Relational benefits in service industries: The
customer’s perspective. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 26(2), 101–114.
Hagel, J., & Armstrong, A. (1997). Net gain: Expanding markets through virtual communities.
Boston: Harvard Business Press.
Harris, K., & Baron, S. (2004). Consumer-to-consumer conversations in service settings. Journal of
Service Research, 6(3), 287–303.
Hayko, D.L., & Baker, J. (2004). It’s all at the mall: Exploring adolescent girls’ experiences. Journal
of Retailing, 80(1), 67–83.
Helgeson, V.S. (2003). Social support and quality of life. Quality of Life Research, 12(1), 25–31.
Hinds, D., & Lee, R.M. (2008, January 7– 10). Social network structure as a critical success con-
dition for virtual communities. In The 41th Hawaii International Conference on System
Sciences (HICSS), Hilton Waikoloa Village Resort, Waikoloa, Big Island, Hawaii, USA.
von Hippel, E. (2001). Perspective: User toolkits for innovation. Journal of Product Innovation
Management, 18(4), 247–257.
Jang, H.Y., Ko, I.S., & Koh, J. (2007, January 3–6). The influence of online brand community
Downloaded By: [HEAL-Link Consortium] At: 06:45 23 September 2009

characteristics on community commitment and brand loyalty. In The 40th Hawaii

International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS), Hilton Waikoloa Village Resort
Waikoloa, Big Island, Hawaii, USA.
Jung, Y. (2008, January 7–10). Influence of sense of presence on intention to participate in a virtual
community. In The 41th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS), Hilton
Waikoloa Village Resort, Waikoloa, Big Island, Hawaii, USA.
Junquera, B., del Brı́o, J.B., & Fernández, E. (2008). The client as co-manufacturer and environ-
mental entrepreneur: A research agenda. The Service Industries Journal, 28(7), 1029–1040.
Kang, Y.S., & Ridgway, N.M. (1996). The importance of consumer market interactions as a form of
social support for elderly consumers. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 15(1), 108–117.
Kelley, S.W., Donnelly, J.H., & Skinner, S.J. (1990). Customer participation in service production
and delivery. Journal of Retailing, 66(3), 315–335.
Khalid, H., & Helander, M. (2003). Web-based do-it-yourself product design. In M. Tseng &
F. Piller (Eds.), The Customer centric enterprise (pp. 247–265). New York: Springer.
Kollock, P. (1999). The economies of online cooperation: Gifts and public goods in cyberspace. In
M. Smith & P. Kollock (Eds.), Communities in cyberspace (pp. 220–239). London:
Routledge.
Krasnova, H., Hildebrand, T., Günther, O., Kovrigin, A., & Nowobilska, A. (2008, June 9– 11). Why
participate in an online social network: An empirical analysis. In The 16th European
Conference on Information Systems (ECIS), National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland.
Lagrosen, S. (2005). Customer involvement in new product development: A relationship marketing
perspective. European Journal of Innovation, 8(4), 424–436.
Langerak, F., Verhoef, P.C., Verlegh, P.W.J., & Valck, K. (2004). The effect of members’ satisfac-
tion with a virtual community on member participation (ERIM Report Series Research in
Management), The Netherlands: Erasmus Research Institute of Management, Erasmus
Universiteit Rotterdam.
Lee, D.Y., Kang, C.H., Kee, J.U., & Park, S.H. (2005). Characteristics of exemplary altruists.
Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 45(2), 146–155.
Lento, T., Welser, H.T., Gu, L., & Smith, M. (2006, May 23). The ties that blog: Relationship
between social ties and continued participation in blogs. In 3rd Annual Workshop on
Weblogging Ecosystems, Edinburg, UK. Retrieved July 23, 2003, from http://www.
blogpulse.com/www2006-workshop/index.html
Li, C., & Stromberg, C. (2007). The ROI of blogging. New York: Forrester Research.
Li, Y.N., Tan, K.C., & Xie, M. (2002). Measuring web-based service quality. Total Quality
Management, 13(5), 685–700.
Lin, Y., & Huang, J. (2006). Internet blogs as a tourism marketing medium: A case study. Journal of
Business Research, 59(10/11), 1201–1205.
Lin, Y., Sundaram, H., Chi, Y., Tatemura, J., & Tseng, B. (2006, May 23). Blog communities based
on mutual awareness. In 3rd Annual Workshop on Weblogging Ecosystems, Edinburg, UK.
Retrieved July 23, 2003, from http://www.blogpulse.com/www2006-workshop/index.html
 The Service Industries Journal 17

Loiacono, E., Watson, R.T., & Goodhue, D. (2000). WebQualTM : A web site quality instrument
(Working Paper), Worcester Polytechnic Institute.
Loiacono, E.T., Watson, R.T., & Goodhue, D.L. (2007). WebQual: An instrument for consumer
evaluation of web sites. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 11(3), 51–87.
Long, M., & McMellon, C. (2004). Exploring the determinants of retail service quality on the
Internet. Journal of Services Marketing, 18(1), 78–90.
Lovelock, C., & Young, R.F. (1979). Look to consumers to increase productivity. Harvard Business
Review, 57, 168–178.
Madu, C., & Madu, A. (2002). Dimensions of e-quality. International Journal of Quality &
Reliability Management, 19(3), 246–258.
McGrath, M., & Otnes, C. (1995). Unacquainted influencers: When strangers interact in the retail
setting. Journal of Business Research, 32(3), 261–272.
Mills, P.K. (1983). The socialisation of clients as partial employees of service organisations
(Working Paper). CA: University of Santa Clara.
Moeller, S. (2008). Customer integration – a key to an implementation perspective of service pro-
vision. Journal of Service Research, 11(2), 197–210.
Pan, Y.X., & Millen, D.R. (2008, January 7–10). Information sharing and patterns of social inter-
action in an enterprise social booking service. In The 41th Hawaii International
Downloaded By: [HEAL-Link Consortium] At: 06:45 23 September 2009

Conference on System Sciences (HICSS), Hilton Waikoloa Village Resort, Waikoloa, Big
Island, Hawaii, USA.
Paolillo, J.C., & Penumarthy, S. (2007, January 3–6). The social structure of tagging internet video
on del.icio.us. In The 40th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS),
Hilton Waikoloa Village Resort Waikoloa, Big Island, Hawaii, USA.
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V.A., & Berry, L.L. (1988). SERVQUAL: A multi-item scale for
measuring consumer perception of service quality. Journal of Retailing, 64(1), 12–40.
Piller, F., Schubert, P., Koch, M., & Möslein, K. (2005). Overcoming mass confusion: Collaborative
customer co-design in online communities. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication,
10(4), article 8. http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol10/issue4/piller.html
Pitta, D., & Fowler, D. (2005). Online consumer communities and their value to new product devel-
opers. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 14(5), 283–291.
Price, L.L., & Arnould, E.J. (1999). Commercial friendships: Service provider-client relationships in
context. Journal of Marketing, 63(4), 38–56.
Rittberger, M. (2000). Quality evaluation of electronic communication fora with evalYOUate. In
B.D. Klein & D.F. Rossin (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2000 Conference on Information
Quality (pp. 137–147). Boston: MIT.
Rosenbaum, M.S. (2006). Exploring the social supportive role of third places in consumers’ lives.
Journal of Service Research, 9(1), 59–72.
Rosenbaum, M.S. (2008). Return on community for consumers and service establishments. Journal
of Service Research, 11(1), 179–196.
Rosenbaum, M.S., & Massiah, C.A. (2007). When customers receive support from other customers.
Exploring the influence of inter-customer social support on customer voluntary performance.
Journal of Service Research, 9(3), 257–270.
Rowley, J., Teahan, B., & Leeming, E. (2007). Customer community and co-creation: A case study.
Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 25(2), 136–146.
Schwabe, G., & Prestipino, M. (2005, May 26 –28). How tourism communities can change travel
information quality. In European Conference in Information Systems (ECIS) 2005
Conference, Regensburg, Germany, ISBN of proceedings: 3-937195-09-2.
Schwarzer, R. (2008). The multidimensional nature of received social support in gay men at risk of
HIV infection and aids. American Journal of Community Psychology, 22(3), 319–336.
Sigala, M. (2004). The ASP-Qual model: Measuring ASP service quality in Greece. Managing
Service Quality, 14(1), 103–114.
Sigala, M. (2006). Mass customisation implementation models and customer value in mobile phones
services: Preliminary findings from Greece. Managing Service Quality, 16(4), 395–420.
Sigala, M. (2008a). Developing and implementing an eCRM 2.0 strategy: Usage and readiness of
Greek tourism firms. In 15th ENTER Annual Conference, Organized by the International
Federation of IT, Tourism and Travel (IFITT), 23 – 25 January, 2008, Innsbruck, Austria.
In Peter O’Connor, Wolfram Höpken, & Ulrike Gretzel (Eds.), Information
and Communication Technologies in Tourism, ENTER 2008, Proceedings of the
 18 M. Sigala

International Conference in Innsbruck (pp. 463–474), Austria, 2008. Springer Verlag 2008,
ISBN 978-3-211-77279-9.
Sigala, M. (2008b, July 30 –August 2). Web 2.0 tools empowering consumer participation in New
Product Development: Findings and implications in the tourism industry. In Annual
International International Council for Hotel, Restaurant and Institutional Education
(I-CHRIE) Convention “Welcoming a new era to hospitality education”, Atlanta, Georgia,
USA. (www.chrie.org).
Sigala, M., & Chalkiti, K. (2007). New service development: Preliminary findings on process
development and assessment from the Greek hotels. Advances in Hospitality and Leisure,
3, 131–153.
Sigala, M., & Sakellaridis, O. (2004). Web users’ cultural profiles and e-service quality:
Internationalization implications for tourism websites. Information Technology and
Tourism, 7(1), 13–22.
Suurmeijer, T.P.B.M., Doeglas, D.M., Briancon, S., Krijnen, W.P., Krol, B., Sanderman, R., et al.
(1995). The measurement of social support in the ‘European research on incapacitating
diseases and social support’: The development of the social support questionnaire for
transactions (SSQT). Social Science Medicine, 40(9), 1221–1229.
Vargo, S.L., & Lusch, R.F. (2004). Evolving to a new dominant logic for marketing. Journal of
Downloaded By: [HEAL-Link Consortium] At: 06:45 23 September 2009

Marketing, 68(1), 1–17.

Voss, C. (2000). Developing eservice strategy. Business Strategy Review, 11(1), 21–33.
Wang, Y., & Fesenmaier, D.R. (2004). Modelling participation in an online travel community.
Journal of Tourism Research, 42(3), 261–270.
Warmbrodt, J., Sheng, H., & Hall, R. (2008, January 7–10). Social network analysis of video blog-
gers’ community. In The 41th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS),
Hilton Waikoloa Village Resort, Waikoloa, Big Island, Hawaii, USA.
Woodside, A.G., & Sims, J. (1976). Retail sales transactions and customer ‘purchase pals’ effect on
buying behavior. Journal of Retailing, 52(3), 57–96.
Yang, Z., & Jun, M. (2002). Consumer perception of e-service quality: From Internet purchaser and
non-purchaser perspectives. Journal of Business Strategies, 19(1), 19–41.
Yang, Z., Peterson, T., & Huang, L. (2001). Taking the pulse of internet pharmacies. Marketing
Health Services, 21(2), 4–10.
Ying, Z., & Davis, J. (2007). Web communities in blogspace. In The 40th Hawaii International
Conference on System Sciences (HICSS), Hilton Waikoloa Village Resort Waikoloa, Big
Island, Hawaii, USA.
Yoo, B., & Donthu, N. (2001). Developing a scale to measure the perceived quality of an internet
shopping site (Sitequal). Quarterly Journal of Electronic Commerce, 2(1), 31–46.
Zeithaml, V. (2002). Service quality in e-channels. Managing Service Quality, 12(3), 135–138.
Zeithaml, V., Parasuraman, A., & Malhotra, A. (2000). A conceptual framework for understanding
e-service quality: Implications for future research and managerial practice (Marketing
Science Institute Working Paper Series, Report No. 00-115). (http://www.emeraldinsight.
com/Insight/ViewContentServlet;jsessionid¼F24164977B692C7B02429A9CD02E7277?
contentType¼Article&Filename¼Published/EmeraldFullTextArticle/Articles/0750180106.
html).

View publication stats