The Influence of Work Satisfaction, Antecedent Satisfaction and Consumer’s Loyalty Through Organizational Citizenship Behavior and Consumer’s Interaction Quality

Reader Impact Factor Score
[Total: 11 Average: 5]

Published on International Journal of Economics & Business
Publication Date: November 2018

Raden Andi Sularso, Iwan Mulyawan, Lanny Purnama Kosasi, Raden Roro Lia Chairina, Purnamie Titi Sari & Fajar Destari

Raden Andi Sularso, Purnamie Titisari & Fajar Destari
Faculty of Economics & Business, University of Jember, Indonesia

Iwan Mulyawan
Bandung Polytechnic, Indonesia

Lanny Purnama Kosasi
Pancasetia Banjarmasin Economics College, Indonesia

Raden Roro Lia Chairina
Jember Polytechnic, Indonesia

Journal Full Text PDF: The Influence of Work Satisfaction, Antecedent Satisfaction and Consumer’s Loyalty Through Organizational Citizenship Behavior and Consumer’s Interaction Quality.

Abstract
This study is included in explanatory research. The population is 18 Matahari Department retail Store in East Java. The respondents in this study are employees of salespeople and consumers, this study is also called dyad research, because it uses two different respondents, while the technique of drawing proportional rondom sampling and sub-samples of consumer sub-samples simple random sampling Data analysis methods used Generalized Structured Components Analysis (GSCA). This study concludes that: 1) Job satisfaction has a significant and positive effect on OCB; 2) Job satisfaction has no significant effect on satisfaction; 3) Job satisfaction has a significant and positive effect on the quality of consumer interaction; 4) OCB has a significant and positive effect on the quality of consumer interaction; 5) OCB has no significant effect on the quality of consumer interaction; 6) Quality of consumer interaction has a significant and positive effect on customer satisfaction; and 7) Consumer satisfaction has no significant effect on consumer loyalty.

Keywords: Job Satisfaction, OCB, Quality of Consumer Interaction, Customer Satisfaction, Customer Loyalty.

1. INTRODUCTION
Research on the relationship between employee satisfaction and customer satisfaction in the retail sector is still not widely done, it is expected that the results of this study can be a reference that supports further studies related to the relationship of employee job satisfaction and customer satisfaction. The object of this study is Matahari Department Store for several reasons. Matahari Department Store is one of the pioneering local retailers of the concept of the first Department Store in Indonesia that is growing rapidly and is able to compete with outside retailers entering Indonesia. Matahari Department Store itself has been a company that went public since 1992.
Global companies experience a shift from conventional approaches to contemporary approaches (Tjiptono, 2011: 480). Conventional approaches emphasize customer satisfaction, cost reduction, market share, and market research. While the contemporary approach focuses on customer loyalty, customer retention, zero defections, and lifelong customers. One strategy that can facilitate customer satisfaction and loyalty is relationship marketing (RM). The theoretical study which is the basis for studying the formation of the relationship between employee job satisfaction and customer satisfaction and customer loyalty refers to the basis of relationship marketing theory.
Gronroos (1990) defines relationship marketing by developing, maintaining, improving and commercializing customer relations to achieve the goals of all parties involved. Relationship marketing not only emphasizes the relationship between organizations and customers, but also with other stakeholders. In the field of consumer satisfaction management (Fornell et, al., 1996; Oliver, 1996) and employee job satisfaction (Brown and Peterson, 1993; Churchill et. Al., 1985) are two of the most studied fields, but not much research connecting the two into one study, although theoretically consumer satisfaction is strongly related to employee satisfaction (Robbins and Judge, 2008: 115; Kotler and Keller, 2012: 364).

2. LITERATURE REVIEW
The Homburg and Stock (2004) study concluded that the relationship between job satisfaction and customer satisfaction is very strong, especially when the quality of consumer interaction increases. This study developed a study conducted by Homburg and Stock (2004), in addition to the three variables above this study included variables of organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) and loyalty generated from studies of other studies. The Homburg and Stock (2004) study only looked at the relationship of employee satisfaction and customer satisfaction through the quality of interactions based on consumer perceptions, but in this study included OCB variables based on employee perceptions. This study will look at the effect of employee job satisfaction both directly on customer satisfaction, or its influence through OCB. According to Robbins and Judge (2008: 115) in service organizations, frontline employees relate to customers.
In service, the relationship between employees and consumers is very intensive (Gastmans, 1998). Therefore service delivery organizations need to reform the relationship between employees and consumers (Bosaquet et.al., 2006; O’Kelly, 1998). In addition, there is also a need to reconfigure the relationship between employees and consumers (May, 1995). According to May (1995) the reform and reconfiguration was carried out by simultaneously improving both the quality of external services provided to consumers and the quality of internal services provided to employees. This reform and reconfiguration is important considering that employees and consumers are involved in very complex relationships in the service process. Interpersonal relations that occur intensively between employees and consumers require the organization not only to measure customer satisfaction, but also to measure employee satisfaction, not only to measure the quality of external services, but also to measure the quality of internal services.
Robbins and Judge (2008: 99) define job satisfaction as a positive feeling about someone’s work which is the result of an evaluation of its characteristics. According to Robbins there is something to remember, namely that work is more than just facing paper, waiting for customers, or driving a truck. But it includes how to relate to coworkers and superiors, follow organizational rules and policies, adhere to performance standards, and live in work conditions that are often not ideal. Whereas according to Kangas and McKee (1999), employee job satisfaction is generally defined as a reaction of employee feelings towards work based on comparing the results obtained with those expected to be accepted. Locke (in Luthans, 2011: 141) provides a comprehensive definition of job satisfaction as involving cognitive, affective, and reaction or evaluative attitudes and is expressed as “happy or positive emotional feelings that result from job assessment or work experience”. According to George and Jones (2012: 75) job satisfaction is a collection of feelings and beliefs that someone has about their current job. Generally built based on the employee’s feelings about variations in the elements of work that are intrinsic. Employees expect their work to provide salary, promotion and autonomy. This means that to define employee satisfaction or job dissatisfaction is a complex matter because many elements influence it. There are six indicators developed by Babin and Boles (1998) and Brayfield and Rothe (1951) which are used to measure employee job satisfaction as a whole. In this study, the indicator is used to measure employee job satisfaction.
In addition, this study also wants to see the effect of employee job satisfaction on OCB and its impact on customer satisfaction. Hansen et al. (2003) said that customer commitment to the company was significantly dependent on customer commitment to employees who contacted customers. In the opinion of Robbins (2003: 113), employee job satisfaction is a major determinant of OCB (organizational citizenship behavior). Robbins further explained that satisfied employees seemed to tend to talk positively about the organization, help other individuals, and meet normal expectations in their work. Empowered and satisfied employees want to reciprocate by giving performance that exceeds the requirements of their roles. The social exchange mechanism defines how job satisfaction relates to OCB (Organ and Ryan, 1995).
Silvestro’s opinion (2002) that one of the behaviors of employees who feel job satisfaction is pay more is interpreted as willing to increase their hours or work extra shifts (willingness to increase hours of work or work with extra shifts).
In addition to the direct effect of job satisfaction on consumer satisfaction and also indirect influence through OCB, this study also sees indirect effects through quality of customer interaction variables. According to Homburg and Stock (2004) job satisfaction will have a positive influence on the quality of consumer interaction. The research conducted by Behrman and Perreault (1994) and Singh et, al., (1996) which shows the relationship between job satisfaction and aspects in the quality of consumer interaction.
Newman and Bal (2002) in his research on employee job satisfaction, employee service quality, and customer satisfaction get the results that employee job satisfaction affects the quality of employee services which ultimately affects customer satisfaction. Whereas Hallowell et.al., (2004) in his research on internal service quality, employee job satisfaction, employee quality serving consumers, and customer satisfaction obtained results that the quality of internal services affected employee job satisfaction which then affected the quality of employees in serving consumers and ultimately affect consumer satisfaction.

3. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
The population of this study was carried out at the Matahari Department Store retail in Java as many as 18 retailers with an analysis unit of salespeople and consumers. This study is also called dyadic research because it uses two different respondents, while the technique of drawing sub-samples of employees using proportional rondom sampling and the technique of withdrawing consumer sub-samples is done by simple random sampling, which is taking consumers served by respondents using odd numbers (1st, 3rd and so on).
Determination of the sample in this study uses the following formula (Anderson et., Al, 2011: 326)::

Where: n is the sample size, zα / 2 is the confidence level used (95% = 1.96), σ is the population standard deviation (using 9.65) and E is the margin of error (using 2). If the data is entered in a formula, it will get n = 89.43 or = 90 people.
The number of salespeople who became a sample is 90 salespeople. Following previous dyadic research (Hartline and Ferrell, 1996; Roman & Iacobucci, 2010), every one (1) salesperson will be assessed by three (3) Matahari Department Store customers, so that 270 respondents will become respondents. Data analysis method uses Generalized Structured Component Analysis (GSCA) inferential statistics and statistics analysis.

4. RESEARCH RESULT
The computational results of the data from this study using the GSCA method obtained a model fit, which can be presented in Table 1 below.

Table 1. Evaluate the Goodness of the Fit Structural Models and the Overall Model of the GSCA
Model Fit
FIT 0.667
AFIT 0.655
GFI 0.991
SRMR 0.176
NPAR 52
Source: Results of analysis, 2017

Based on the goodness-of-fit of the structural model and overall model with the FIT, AFIT, GFI and SRMS tests, it can be concluded that the complexity of the models specified in this study is able to explain 65.50% of the data variants that have been corrected. Similarly, the value of GFI = 0.991 and SRMR = 0.176 which indicates a good model fit (GFI ≥ 0.90 and SRMR is close to zero). The results of testing the direct effect can be seen from the value of the path coefficient and critical point (CR *) which is significant at α = 0.05 presented in the path diagram of Figure 1.
The test results in Figure 1 show that of the seven direct effects between the variables tested there were four significant influences, namely: (1) variable employee job satisfaction has a significant effect on OCB, (2) employee job satisfaction has a significant effect on the quality of consumer interaction, (3) OCB significant effect on the quality of consumer interaction, and (4) the quality of consumer interaction has a significant effect on customer satisfaction. While (1) variable employee job satisfaction has no significant effect on consumer satisfaction, 2) OCB has no significant effect on consumer satisfaction, (3) customer satisfaction has no significant effect on consumer loyalty. The results of testing the direct influence between variables are presented in Table 2.

Figure 1.Path Coefficient and Hypothesis Testing

Table 2. Direct Influence Coefficient and Hypothesis Testing Results
Hipotesis Direct Path C.R Sig. Explanation
H1 B satisfaction  OCB 0.360 2.06* Significant Accepted
H2 Job satisfaction  customer satisfaction -0.131 1.88 Not Signifikan Rejected
H3 Job satisfaction  Interaction Quality 0.352 3.6* Significant Accepted
H4 OCB  Interaction Quality 0.362 4.28* Significant Accepted
H5 OCB  Custmer Satisfaction 0.048 0.86 Not Signifikan Rejected
H6

Interaction Quality  Customer Satisfaction 0.839 20.09* Significant Accepted
H7 Customer Satisfaction  Customer Loyalty 0.315 1.32 Not Significant Rejected
Explanation :
CR* = significant at level .05
Source: Analysis Results, 2017

Testing the hypothesis of direct influence can be explained below:
The effect of employee job satisfaction on OCB is 0.360 with a positive direction, CR is 2.06 * and p-value is at α = 0.05. This means that the increase in employee job satisfaction is unidirectional and real to the increase in OCB. The effect of employee job satisfaction on customer satisfaction is -0.131, CR of 1.88 and p-value of more than 0.05 means not significant at the 95% confidence level. Indicates that the better the implementation of employee job satisfaction, the lower the customer satisfaction, but the opposite direction relationship is not significant. The effect of employee job satisfaction on the quality of consumer interaction is 0.352 with CR of 3.6 * and p-value α = 0.05, which means that the better the implementation of employee job satisfaction, the better the quality of employee interaction with consumers. The effect of OCB on the quality of consumer interaction is 0.362 with CR of 4.28 and p-value of α = 5%, the higher the implementation of OCB, the better the quality of employee interaction with consumers. The effect of OCB on consumer satisfaction is 0.048 with a CR of 0.86 and the probability (p-value) of more than 0.05 means that it is not significant at the 95% confidence level indicates that the higher the OCB implementation, the higher the customer satisfaction, but the unidirectional relationship is not significant. The effect of consumer interaction on consumer satisfaction is 0.839 with CR of 20.09 * and the probability value (p-value) is significant at α = 0.05. the better the application of quality consumer interaction, the higher customer satisfaction. The direct effect of consumer satisfaction on consumer loyalty is 0.315 with a CR of 1.32 * and p-value greater than α = 0.05 indicates that the higher the implementation of customer satisfaction, the higher consumer loyalty, but not significantly.

5. DISCUSSION
(1) Employee job satisfaction has a significant effect on OCB
The results of the analysis in this study indicate that employee job satisfaction has a significant and positive effect on OCB. These results indicate that if employee job satisfaction increases, the OCB of employees is also expected to increase. Job satisfaction according to Locke (1976) is interpreted as a pleasant or positive emotional state that results from the assessment of a job or work experience. Whereas Robbins and Coulter (2012: 374) explain job satisfaction refers to the general attitude of an employee to his job. This finding supports the view that there is a relationship between job satisfaction and OCB which is explained by social exchange theory (Konovsky & Pugh, 1994; Moorman, 1991; Podsakoff et al., 1990). In other words, when work meets one’s personal needs (Locke, 1976), job satisfaction will lead to agreement relationships, which will lead to OCB behavior. Other research conducted by several previous researchers, including Yoon and Suh (2003), found that job satisfaction had a significant effect on OCB.

(2) Employee job satisfaction has no significant effect on customer satisfaction
The results of this study indicate that employee job satisfaction does not affect consumer satisfaction directly, this can be interpreted that employees who are satisfied with their work will not directly affect customer satisfaction directly but through intermediaries, including through increasing OCB. The results of this study when associated with the theory of emotional transmission, shows that expressions or emotions about satisfaction shown by employees are not directly understood by consumers but must go through the quality of interaction first. From the quality of these interactions, consumers can find out how to assess the expressions or emotions of Matahari Department Store employees in serving their customers. If the expression or emotion transmitted by the employee is positive in the form of the quality of the interaction, then it will also be interpreted positively or transmitted positively to the consumer (Mason & Griffin 2002, in Whitman et., Al. 2010). The results of this study are different from the results of research conducted by Homburg and Stock (2004) which found a significant relationship between employee job satisfaction and customer satisfaction. The different results obtained can be due to many things, including the object of research on Homburg and Stock (2004) conducted in B2B organizations (business to business) where the level of intensity and quality of meetings between employees and consumers is clearly different compared to retail organizations in this study.

(3) Employee job satisfaction has a significant effect on the quality of consumer interaction
As explained in the previous relationship which said that the basis of the theory in explaining the relationship between employee satisfaction and customer satisfaction is transmission of emotions (Ashforth & Humphrey, 1995; Howard and Gengler, 2001). The more positive employee satisfaction, the quality of consumer interaction will be considered positive. Positive assessment of the quality of the interaction will provide positive emotional transmission to consumers which will lead to an increase in customer satisfaction with Matahari Department Store. The results of this study support the study conducted by Homburg and Stock (2004) which found the results of a positive and significant relationship between employee job satisfaction and the quality of interactions with consumers. Furthermore, job satisfaction and customer satisfaction will provide a strong relationship and influence when supported by high quality consumer interaction. It can be concluded that, in the case of high quality interactions when coupled with high job satisfaction, it will also provide high customer satisfaction.

(4) OCB has a significant effect on the quality of consumer interaction
The relationship between OCB and the quality of this interaction is based on Yoon & Suh (2003) ‘s opinion that extra role activities such as OCB are important factors to influence service quality with customer satisfaction. OCB contributes both directly and indirectly to the creation of perceptions about superior service quality (Morrison, 1996). The results of this study indicate that OCB has a significant effect on the quality of consumer interaction. The results of this study can be explained based on the concept of “emotional contagion” from Howard and Gengler (2001). This can be explained that the level of job satisfaction of employees at Matahari Department Store will affect the quality of their interactions with consumers both directly and indirectly through OCB which can be seen from the emotional transmission process, it can be when an employee feels job dissatisfaction can be seen emotionally change behavior in serving consumers. This study supports the theory of emotional transmission from (Ashforth & Humphrey, 1995; Howard and Gengler, 2001), or studies from Singh et al. (1994) emotional contagion process (emotional transmission).

(5) OCB has no significant effect on customer satisfaction
This study supports the theory of Cycles of Failure, Mediocrity, and Success from Lovelock (2001: 466). That is, if the quality received by employees will affect satisfaction and loyalty to the company. Because employee satisfaction and loyalty are not maximally fulfilled, OCB cannot run well to increase the satisfaction of Matahari Department Store customers. The results of this study support the results of a study from Castro et al., (2004) which showed that there was no influence between OCB and customer satisfaction. Castro et al. (2004) also explained that turnover greatly affects the application of OCB between employees and consumers within an organization. Different results between this study and the study of Bettencourt and Brown (1997) can be due to several things, including: first, the Bettencourt and Brown research was conducted on bank employees who have worked for more than 1 year, while in this study in retail businesses and none duration of work. Second, banking organizations in the Bettencourt and Brown study have units that focus on the application of OCB.

(6) The quality of consumer interaction has a significant effect on customer satisfaction
This study develops from opinions, for example Bhagat (1991, 1982); Brown and Peterson (1993, 1994) who say that salesperson job satisfaction will have a positive influence on the quality of consumer interaction. The results of this study indicate that the quality of consumer interaction has a significant effect on customer satisfaction. These results indicate that if Matahari Department Store employees are able to provide high quality interaction to consumers, especially related to the patience and patience of employees in serving their customers, it will have a significant impact on the satisfaction of the Matahari Department Store customers. The results of this study support the results of research from Homburg and Stock (2004) which showed a positive and significant relationship between the quality of the consumer interaction with customer satisfaction. These findings also support other findings conducted by Anderson and Narus (1990); Cannon and Perreault (1999), it’s just that what distinguishes these findings from other findings is the object of previous research conducted on B2B while this study is directly between employees and end consumers.

(7) Consumer satisfaction has no significant effect on consumer loyalty
Achieved customer satisfaction will have consequences for the company, including customer retention, voice, and price sensitivity (Szymnaski and Henard, 2001; Zeithaml, Berry and Parasuraman, 1996), recommendations and repurchase intention (Cronin and Taylor, 1992; Gottlieb, et al. 1994; Taylor, 1997; Taylor and Baker, 1994), and loyalty intentions (Cronin, Brady and Hult, 2000; Cronin and Taylor, 1992; Gottlieb, et al., 1994; Spreng and Singh, 1993). According to Schnaars (in Tjiptono, 2001: 24) basically the purpose of a business is to create satisfied customers. Consequences of consumer satisfaction according to Oliver (1997: 27) include repurchase decisions, changes in attitude, subsequent satisfaction, and loyalty.
The results of the analysis in this study indicate that customer satisfaction has no significant effect on consumer loyalty. Related to this study, non-significant results can be due to several things, including: the first object in this study is retail for the middle class; both respondents in this study were price sensitive middle class; the three consumer shopping behavior patterns that may have seasonal characteristics; and fourth can be due to low customer satisfaction related to service. Because of this, consumers may still go shopping at Matahari Department Store due to price discounts or at certain seasons such as the religious holidays.

6. CONCLUSION
This study concludes that: 1) Job satisfaction has a significant and positive effect on OCB; 2) Job satisfaction has no significant effect on satisfaction; 3) Job satisfaction has a significant and positive effect on the quality of consumer interaction; 4) OCB has a significant and positive effect on the quality of consumer interaction; 5) OCB has no significant effect on the quality of consumer interaction; 6) Quality of consumer interaction has a significant and positive effect on customer satisfaction; and 7) Consumer satisfaction has no significant effect on consumer loyalty.

7. REFERENCE
[1] Anderson, David R., Sweeney, Dennis J., & Williams, Thomas A. 2011. Statistics for Business and Economics. USA : South-Western Cengage Learning.
[2] Anderson, James C, and Narus, James A. 1990. A Model of Distributor Firm and Manufacturer Firm Working Partnerships. Journal of Marketing. Vol. 54, Pp. 42-58.
[3] Ashforth B and Humphrey R. 1995. Emotion in the workplace: A Reappraisal. Human Relations. Vol. 48, Pp. 97-125.
[4] Babin, Barry J., dan Boles, James, S., 1998. Employee Behavior in a Service Environment: A Model and Test of Potential Differences Between Men and Women. Journal of Marketing. No. 62. Pp. 77-91.
[5] Behrman, Barry and Joel R. Evans, 2001. Retail Management A Strategic Approach. USA : Prentice Hall International Inc.
[6] Behrman, Douglas N., dan Perreault, William D. 1994. A Role Stress Model of the Performance and Satisfaction of Industrial Salespersons. Journal of Marketing. No. 48. Pp. 9-21.
[7] Behrman, Barry and Joel R. Evans, 2001. Retail Management A Strategic Approach. USA : Prentice Hall International Inc.
[8] Bettencourt, L. A., & Brown, S. W. 1997. Customer-contact employees: Relationships among workplace fairness, job satisfaction and prosocial service behaviors. Journal of Retailing, Vol. 73, Pp. 39–61.
[9] Bosaquest, Nick, Andrew Haldenby, Henry de Zoete, dan Roger Fox, 2006, Staffing and Human Resources In the NHS – Facing Up to the Reform Agenda, Reform, pp 1-46.
[10] Brayfield, Arthur H., dan Herold F., Rothe, 1951. An Index of Job Satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 35 (October): 307-311.
[11] Cannon, Joseph P., dan Homburg, Christian. 2001. Buyer-Seller Relationships and Customer Firm Costs. Journal of Marketing. No.65. Pp. 29-43.
[12] ______________., dan William D. Perreault Jr. 1999. Buyer-Seller Relationships in Business Markets. Journal of Marketing Research 36 (November): 439-460.
[13] Castro, Carmen Barroso, Armario, Enrique Martin dan Ruiz, David Martin. 2004. The Influence of Employee Organizational Citizenship Behavior on Customer Loyalty. International Journal of Service Industry Management. Vol. 5, No. 1, Pp. 27-53.
[14] Chan, Lai K., Hui, Yer V., Lo, Hing P., Tse, Siu K., Tso, Geoffry K.F., and Wu, Ming L., 2003, Consumer Satisfaction Index: New Practice and Findings. European Journal of Marketing. Vol. 37, No. 5/6, Pp. 872-909.
[15] Cronin, J., Brady, M., and Hult, G.T., 2000, Assessing the Effect of Quality, Value and Customer Satisfaction on Consumer Behavioral Intentions in Service Environments. Journal of Retailing, Vol. 76, No. 2, Pp. 193-218.
[16] Cronin, J., and Taylor, S., 1992, Measuring Service Quality: A Reexamination and Extension. Journal of Marketing, Vol. 56, No. 3, Pp. 55-68.
[17] Darandono. 2012. Bisnis Ritel Di Indonesia Kian Menjanjikan, http://swa.co.id/business-strategy/marketing, Februari.
[18] Eakuru, N. & Mat, N. K. N. 2008. The application of structural equation modeling (SEM) in determining the antecedents of customer loyalty in banks in South Thailand. The Business Review, Cambridge, 10(2), 129-139.
[19] Filho, Cid G., Guerra, R. S., & Moura, A. I., (2004). Impact of Satisfaction, Quality, Loyalty, Value and Expectations in Higher Education Institutions: An Empirical Study. Second World Conference on POM and 15th Annual POM Conference. Cancun, Mexico.
[20] Fornell, C., Johnson, M. D. Anderson, E., Cha, J., and Bryant, B. E., 1996, The American Customer Satisfaction Index: Nature, Purpose, and Findings. Journal of Marketing, Vol. 60 (October), Pp. 7-18.
[21] Gastmans, Chris. 1998. Interpersonal Relation in Nursing: a Philosophical-Ethical Analisis of The Work of The Work of Hildegard E. Peplau. Journal of Advanced Nursing. Vol. 28. Pp 1312-1319.
[22] Goerge, Jennifer M., dan Jones, Gareth R. 2012. Understanding and Managing Organizational Behavior. 6th edition. Pearson Education Inc., Publishing as Prentice Hall, One Lake Street, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey.
[23] Gottlieb, J., Grewal, D., and Brown, S.W., 1994, Consumer Satisfaction and Perceived Quality: Complementary or Divergent Constructs. Journal of Applied Psychology. Vol. 79, No. 6, Pp. 875-885.
[24] Ghozali Imam, 2008. Generalized Structured Component Analysis (GSCA). Badan Penerbit Universitas Dipanegoro.
[25] Gronroos, C. 1990. Relationship Approach to Marketing in Service Contexts: the Marketing and Organizational Interface. Journal of Business Research. Vol. 20, Pp. 3-11.
[26] Hallowell, Roger, Leonard A Schlesinger, dan Jeffrey Zornitsky. 2004. Internal Service Quality, Custumer and Job Satisfaction: Linkages and Implications for Management. Human Resource Planning. Pp 20-31.
[27] Hansen, H., Sandvick, K., dan Selnes, F. 2003. Direct and Inderect Effects of Commitment to a Service Employee on the Intention to Stay. Journal of Service Ressearch. Vol. 5. No. 4. Pp. 356-368.
[28] Hartline, M. D., & Ferrell, O. C. 1996. The management of customer-contact service employees: an empirical investigation. Journal of Marketing, 60 (4), 52–70.
[29] Homburg, Christian dan Stock, Ruth M., 2004. The Link Between Salespeople’s Job Satisfaction and Customer Satisfaction in a Business-to-Business Context: A Dyadic Analysis. Academy of Marketing Science Journal. No. 32. Pp. 144-158.
[30] Homburg, Christian, 1998, On Closeness to the Customer in Industrial Markets. Journal of Business-to-Business Marketing 4 (4): 35-72.
[31] Howard, Daniel J, and Gengler, Charles. 2001. Emotional Contagion Effects of Product Attitudes. Journal of Consumer Research. Vol. 28, Pp. 189-201.
[32] Kangas, S, Kee CC dan McKee-Waddle R. 1999. Organisational factors, Nurses’ Job Satisfaction, and Patient Satisfaction With Nursing Care. Journal of Nursing Administration. Vol 1. Pp 32-42.
[33] Konovsky, M.A. & Pugh, S.D. (1994). Citizenship behaviour and social exchange. Academy of Management Journal, 37 (3), 656-669.
[34] Kotler, Philip and Keller, Kevin Lane. 2012. Marketing Management. 14th edition. Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall, One Lake Street, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey.
[35] Locke, E. 1976. The nature and causes of job satisfaction. In M. D. Dunnette (Ed.). Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology. Chicago: Rand McNally.
[36] Lovelock, Christopher H. 2001. Principles of Services marketing: people, technology, strategy. Prentice Hall, London.
[37] Luthans, Fred. 2011. Organizational Behavior: An Evidence-Based Approach. 12th edition. McGraw-Hill/Irwin, New York.
[38] May, Carl. 1995. Patint Autonomy and The Poltics of Professional Relationships, Journal of Advanced Nursing. Vol. 21. Pp 83-87.
[39] Ma’ruf, Hendri, 2005. Pemasaran Ritel, Jakarta: Penerbit PT. Gramedia Pustaka Utama.
[40] Moorman, R.H. 1991. Relationship Between Organizational Justice and Organizational Citizenship Behaviors: Do Fairness Perceptions Influence Employee Citizenship?. Journal of Applied Psychology. Vol. 76, Pp. 845-855.
[41] Morrison, E.W. 1996. Organizational Citizenship Behaviour as a Critical Link Between HRM Practices and Service Quality. Human Resource Management. Vol. 35, Pp. 493-512.
[42] Newman, Karin, Uvanney, and Bal Chansarkar, 2002, “The Nurse Satisfaction, Service Quality and Nurse retention Chain: Implications for Management of Recruitment and Retention”, Journal of Manajement in Medicine, Vol. 16, pp 271-291.
[43] Oliver, Richard L., 1996. Satisfaction: A Behavioral Perspective on the Consumer, New York: McGraw-Hill.
[44] Oliver, Richard L., 1997, Satisfaction, A Behavioral Perspective on the Consumer, First Edition, Mc Graw-Hill Companies, Inc., New York.
[45] Organ, D.W., dan Ryan, K., 1995. A Meta-Analytic Review of Attitudinal and Dispositional Predictors of Organizational Citizenship Behavior. Personnel Pschology. Vol. 48. Pp. 775-782.
[46] Organ, D. W. 1977. A reappraisal and reinterpretation of the satisfaction causes performance hypothesis. Academy of Management Review, 2: 46-53.
[47] Organ, D. W. 1988. Organizational citizenship behavior: The “good soldier” syndrome. Lex-ington, MA: Lexington Books.
[48] O’Kelly, Gabrielle, 1998, Countertransference in the Nurse-Patient Relationship: A Review of the Literature, Journal of Advanced Nursing, Vol. 28, pp 391-397.
[49] O’Loughlin, Christina & Coenders, Germa, (2002). Aplication of the European Customer Satisfaction Index to Postal Services. Structural Equation Models Versus Partial Least Squares. Departament d’Economia, Universitat de Girona.
[50] Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Moorman, R.H., & Fetter, R. 1990. Transformational leader behaviours and their effects on followers’ trust in leader, satisfaction, and organizational citizenship behaviours. Leadership Quarterly. Vol. 1, No. 2, Pp. 107–142.
[51] Robbins, Stepen P. dan Timothy A. Judge. 2008. Organizational Behavior, Twelfth Edition. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Education Inc.
[52] Robbins, Stephen P., 2003. Organizational Behavior: Concepts, Controversies, and Applications. 6th edition. Prentice Hall Internasional, Inc., New Jersey: Englewood Cliffs.
[53] ________________., dan Judge, Timothy A. 2008. Perilaku Organisasi. Penerbit Salemba Empat, Jakarta.
[54] ________________., and Coulter, Mary. 2012. Management. 11th edition. Pearson Education, Inc., publishing as Prentice Hall, One Lake Street, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey.
[55] Roman, Sergio, and Iacobucci, Dawn. 2010. Antecedents and consequences of adaptive selling confidence and behavior: a dyadic analysis of salespeople and their customers. Academy of Marketing Science. Vol. 38, Pp. 363-382.
[56] Schneider, Benjamin; Ehrhart, Mark G., Mayer, David M., Saltz, Jessica L., dan Niles-Jolly, Kathryn. 2005. Understanding Organization-Customer Links in Service Settings. Academy of Management Journal. Vol. 48, No. 6, Pp. 1017-1032.
[57] Silvestro, Rhian. 2002. Dispelling the Modern Myth: Employee Satisfaction and Loyalti Drive Service Profitability. International Journal of Operation & Production Management. Vol 22. No 1. Pp 30-49.
[58] Singh, Jagdip, Verbeke, Willem, dan Rhoads, Gary K., 1996. Do Organizational Practices Matter in Role Stress Processes? A Study of Direct and Moderating Effects for Marketing-Oriented Boundary Spanners. Journal of Marketing. No. 60. Pp. 69-86.
[59] Spreng, R., and Singh., A.K., 1993, An Empirical Assessment of the SERVQUAL Scale and the Relationship Between Service Quality and Satisfaction. In D. Craven & P. Dickson (Eds.), Enhancing Knowledge Development in Marketing: Volume 4 (Pp. 1-6). Chicago: American Marketing Association.
[60] Szymanski, D., and Henard, D., 2001, Customer satisfaction: A Meta-Analysis of the Empirical Evidence. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 29, No. 1, Pp. 16-35.
[61] Taylor, S., 1997, Assessing Regression-Based Importance Weights for Quality Perceptions and Satisfaction Judgements in the Presence of Higher Order and/or Interaction Effects. Journal of Retailing. Vol. 73, No. 1, Pp. 135-159.
[62] Taylor, S., and Baker, T., 1994, An Assessment of the Relationship Between Service Quality and Customer Satisfaction in the Formation of Consumers’ Purchase Intentions. Journal of Retailing. Vol. 70, No. 2, Pp. 163-178.
[63] Tjiptono, Fandy. 2003. Prinsip-Prinsip Total Quality Service. Yogyakarta: Andi.
[64] _____________. 2011. Pemasaran Jasa. Bayumedia Publishing, Jawa Timur.
[65] Tu, Yu-Te, Li, Mei-Lin dan Chih, Heng-Chi. 2011. The Effect of Service Quality, Customer Perceived Value, and Satisfaction on Loyalty. Journal of Economics and Behavioral Studies. Vol. 3, No. 3, Pp. 198-212.
[66] Verbeke, Willem. 1997. Individual Differences in Emotional Contagion of Salespersons: Its Effect on Performance and Burnout. Psychology and Marketing. Vol. 14, No. 6, Pp. 617-636.
[67] Whitman, Daniel S., Van Rooy, David L., and Viswesvaran, C. 2010. Satisfaction, Citizenship Behaviors, and Performance in Work Units: A Meta-Analysis of Collective Construct Relations. Personnel Psychology. Vol. 63, Pp. 41-81.
[68] Yoon, M & Suh, J. 2003. Organizational Citizenship Behaviours and Service Quality as External Effectiveness of Contact Employees. Journal of Business Research. Vol. 56, Pp. 597-611.
[69] Zeithaml, V., Berry, L., and Parasuraman, A., 1996, The Behavioral Consequences of Service Quality. Journal of Marketing, Vol. 60, No. 2, Pp. 31-46.