Search results

Why do some customers cross‐buy different services from the same provider while others are less disposed to do so? The present research examines the drivers of the customers’ cross‐buying intentions for services. Cross‐buying refers to the customer's practice of buying additional products and services from the existing service provider in addition to the ones s/he currently has. The results obtained from two samples of service consumers indicate that the customers’ cross‐buying intentions are primarily associated with image conflicts about the provider's abilities to deliver high‐quality services from different service activities, and the perceived convenience of cross‐buying from the same provider. Customers’ experiences with the service provider have a weaker or marginal effect on cross‐buying.

The current work reviews all retailing articles published in four prominent retailing journals – Journal of Retailing, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, and International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research – in the 2009-2015 period, picking up where Runyan and Hyun (2009) left off. The purpose of this paper is to identify leading authors and institutions in retailing research based on overall impact.

Content analysis/literature review/descriptive research.

In total, 1,392 articles were published during this time period, and through a procedure of weights and adjustments for author count, journal impact, journal quality, and journal publishing opportunity, the findings reveal that research collaboration is highly prevalent, as evidenced by the high number of multi-authored papers and cross-university/international partnerships. Additionally, some authors and institutions remain influential, while others have emerged as highly influential in the last seven years. This shows the dynamic nature of the field and the need to remain active in quality publishing.

Scholars must understand that several factors influence impact judgments, which cannot be assessed using raw counts alone. Journal quality, impact, and publishing opportunity as well as author counts are important elements to consider.

These reviews are vital to the field in that they provide status updates on scholarship, so these reviews should be done periodically. Additionally, the findings in this paper provide a more holistic understanding of research impact and permit better assessment for scholars and administrators.