the service journey

Donate to our Disaster Relief Fund to support communities impacted by recent flooding and other disasters.

• Club President/First Vice President
• Club Secretary
• Club Treasurer
• Club Service Chairperson
• Club Membership Chairperson
• Managing Your Club
• Managing Your District
• Managing Your Multiple District
• Managing Your Zone & Region
• District Goals
• Childhood Cancer Chairperson
• Diabetes Chairperson
• Environment Chairperson
• Hunger Chairperson
• Vision Chairperson
• YCE Chairperson
• Coordinating Lion
• Leo District & Multiple District Leadership
• Leo/Leo-Lion Cabinet & Council Liaison
• Past District Governors
• Global Action Team Roles & Resources
• Global Service Team Toolbox
• Global Membership Team and Global Extension Team Toolbox
• Global Leadership Team Toolbox
• Presidential Theme
• Finance Resources
• Legal Resources
• Lion Portal Updates
• How to Plan a District Convention
• Make Your Club Visitation Count
• Member, Officer or Club Information Requests
• Membership Report Toolbox
• LCIF Leadership Toolkit
• New Voices Initiative
• Speaker Request Notification Form
• Childhood Cancer
• Disaster Relief
• Environment
• Humanitarian
• Diabetes Camps
• Diabetes Peer Support Groups
• Strides for Diabetes Awareness
• Type 2 Diabetes Screening
• Lions Eye Banks
• Recycle Eyeglasses
• Eyeglass Recycling Centers
• Lions Quest
• Youth Camps & Exchange
• The Service Journey
• Service Launchpad
• Service Project Planners
• Service Reporting
• Service Toolkit
• Corporate Social Responsibility
• Sight for Kids
• The Choose Kindness Project
• LCIF & Global Hope Partnership Africa
• Lions & UNODC: Partners in Prevention
• Special Olympics
• The Carter Center
• World Health Organization
• Branch Club
• Campus Club
• Traditional Club
• Virtual Club
• MISSION 1.5
• Global Membership Approach
• Family Membership
• Rebuilding & Reactivating Clubs
• Start a New Club
• Cub Program
• Club Quality Initiative
• Get To Know GAT
• Guiding Lion Program
• Improving Club Quality
• Member Orientation
• Mentoring Programs
• New Members
• Worldwide Induction Day
• Leo Club Advisor
• Leo Club Advisory Panel
• Leo Club Leadership

Leo-Lion Program

• Show Your Leo Pride
• Start a Leo Club
• Young Lions Hub
• Lions International Brand
• Logos & Brand Guidelines
• Club Marketing
• Lions Press Center
• Social Media
• Lions International Convention
• Lions Day with the United Nations
• International Forums
• International Leo Day Video Contest
• Peace Poster Contest
• Peace Essay Contest
• White Cane Safety Day
• LION Magazine
• Lions Video Center
• LCIF Stories of Pride
• The Lions Blog
• Leadership Development
• Vice District Governor Training Programs
• FVDG/DGE Training Program
• Second Vice District Governor Training Program
• Club Officer Training
• Zone Chairperson Workshop
• Leo Advancement Sessions
• Leo Club Advisor Training
• Leadership Development Institutes
• Emerging Lions Leadership Institute (ELLI)
• Faculty Development Institute (FDI)
• Lions Certified Instructor Program (LCIP)
• Regional Lions Leadership Institute (RLLI)
• Lions Learning Center
• Virtual Events Center
• Club Marketing Guide
• LCIF Grants Toolkit
• Childhood Cancer Grant
• Designated Grants
• Diabetes Grant
• Disaster Grants
• District & Club Community Impact Grants
• Hunger Grant
• Lions Quest Grant
• Matching Grant
• Vision Grant
• Grant Types
• Leadership Development Institute Grants
• Leadership Development Multiple District & District Grants
• Marketing Grants
• Membership Development Grants
• Melvin Jones Fellowship
• Presidential LCIF Recognition
• LCIF Recognition Program
• MISSION 1.5 Awards
• Presidential Awards Initiatives
• Membership Awards
• Jesse Robinson Membership Growth Cup
• Membership Key Awards
• Chevron Awards
• Extension Awards
• Lions International Marketing Award
• Kindness Matters Service Award
• Leo & Leo-Lion Awards & Recognitions
• Humanitarian Award Winners
• Club Excellence Awards
• District Team Excellence Awards
• Zone & Region Chairperson Awards
• YCE Chairperson Award
• Young Leaders in Service Award

Leos have been serving communities for over 60 years and gaining valuable leadership experience in the process. The Leo-Lion membership program offers Leos an opportunity to continue their service journey as Lions members.

Who can become a Leo-Lion?

Current or former Leos between the ages of legal majority through age 35, who have served as Leos for at least a year and a day, can continue serving their communities as Leo-Lion members!

Lions under age 36, who previously aged out of the Leo-Lion program may rejoin the program, by contacting their club secretaries. Those officers can update the member records in MyLCI  by choosing the Leo-Lion member type on the edit member page. Discount benefits are limited to the period of their active Leo-Lion membership for the billing period starting January 2020, and are not retroactive.  

Membership has its benefits

• 50% discount on international dues
• Entrance or charter fee waiver
• Exclusive Leo-Lion membership pin
• Years of Leo service credited to the Lion record
• Exclusively for Leo-Lion members : LinkedIn Leo-Lion professional networking group // Request to join
• Eligible to serve as a Leo-Lion board liaison  Info Sheet
• Eligible to serve as a Leo-Lion cabinet or council liaison Role Description
• Option to serve in a Leo-Lion Club or any other Lion club type
• Continued connection to the Leo identity under the name “Leo-Lion”

Leo-Lion Program Scholarships

• In-person scholarship opportunity for attending an international Faculty Development Institute (FDI) Info Sheet / Apply Now
• Leo-Lion Cultural Exchange Ambassador-International Service Scholarship opportunity  Info Sheet

Leo-Lion Online Learning Courses

A special online learning path is available on the Lions Learning Center (LLC) developed using responses from Leo-Lions who were surveyed from around the world. Topics included were identified by Leo-Lions as most important to them for their leadership and personal development.

Access the LLC

Featured resources

From leo to lion, how to keep serving, meet the leo-lion board liaisons.

China Hong Kong Biography

Rodolpho Gonçalves da Silva

Potirendaba, São Paulo, Brazil Biography

Membership awards

Learn about club, district and multiple district level awards for guiding Leos through the process of becoming Leo-Lion members and forming new Leo-Lion clubs.  Contact [email protected] for more information about the Leo-Lion program and these special awards.  

Get started today!

To become a Leo-Lion, Leos should talk to their Leo club advisor about joining their sponsoring Lions club or find a club near them. New Leo-Lion members can be added to a club via MyLCI. Choose “Leo-Lion” member type. The Leo to Lion Certification Form (LL2)   may be used as a template for information needed in MyLCI or local reporting systems, but are not required to be submitted to Lions Clubs International.

Some Leos choose to become Lions while also continuing to be active members in their Leo clubs for a brief period of time . Learn more by checking out the guidelines for Dual Leo and Lion memberships .

Transfer Leos to Lions Membership

Transitioning Leo to Leo-Lion membership in MyLCI is easy.

Leo to Lion frequently asked questions

The first step should include reviewing your record with your Leo club secretary and Leo club advisor. Be sure that you are reported and that your personal information is correct, along with your leadership records. This includes confirming that:

• Your first and last/family name is correct
• Your birthdate is correct
• Your shipping address is current
• Your Leo start date is correct to ensure you receive credit for your years of service
• Your leadership roles have been accurately recorded

Now is a great time to explore what kind of club you’d like to join. Lions International has a variety of membership options for Leos taking their next step, but we recommend reading up on the benefits of joining the Leo-Lion Program first.

End-dating is an automated process by Lions International that closes Leo records (of Alphas and Omegas who have reached the maximum age) that have not yet been closed by their clubs on or before June 30 of each Lion year. This means that if you are not transferred to a Lions club before the end of the Lion year, your Leo record will be automatically closed by Lions international.

If you are reaching the end of your service eligibility as a Leo, reach out to your Leo club advisor and sponsoring Lions club secretary for help in taking the next steps in your service journey.

Join or charter a Leo-Lion club

Leo-Lions have the option to serve in a variety of club types. One option is serving in a Leo-Lion club. 

The Leo-Lion brand

Leo-lion logos, leo-lion brand guidelines, global brand guidelines.

For more information about the Leo-Lion membership program, contact the Membership Division at [email protected] .

• Press Center
• Video Center
• Brand Guidelines
• Contact LCI
• Contact LCIF
• Your Privacy

300 W. 22nd Street

Oak Brook, IL 60523-8842 USA

+1 (630) 571-5466

All donations accepted on lionsclubs.org support Lions Clubs International Foundation (LCIF), which is a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt public charitable organization. Lions Clubs International (LCI) is a 501(c)(4) tax-exempt social welfare organization and is not eligible to accept or solicit charitable donations. LCI and LCIF are EEO providers.

Welcome to Lions International!

Service journey quality: conceptualization, measurement and customer outcomes

Journal of Service Management

ISSN : 1757-5818

Article publication date: 4 May 2021

Issue publication date: 17 December 2021

The quality of the customer journey has become a critical determinant of successful service delivery in contemporary business. Extant journey research focuses on the customer path to purchase, but pays less attention to the touchpoints related to service delivery and consumption that are key for understanding customer experiences in service-intensive contexts. The purpose of this study is to conceptualize service journey quality (SJQ), develop measures for the construct and study its key outcomes.

Design/methodology/approach

The study uses a discovery-oriented research approach to conceptualize SJQ by synthesizing theory and field-based insights from customer focus group discussions. Next, using consumer survey data ( N  = 278) from the financial services context, the authors develop measures for the SJQ. Finally, based on an additional survey dataset ( N  = 239), the authors test the nomological validity and predictive relevance of the SJQ.

SJQ comprises of three dimensions: (1) journey seamlessness, (2) journey personalization and (3) journey coherence. This study demonstrates that SJQ is a critical driver of service quality and customer loyalty in contemporary business. This study finds that the loyalty link is partially mediated through service quality, indicating that SJQ explains loyalty above and beyond service quality.

Research limitations/implications

Since service quality only partially mediates the link between service journey quality and customer loyalty, future studies should examine alternative mediators, such as customer experience, for a more comprehensive understanding of the performance effects.

Practical implications

The study offers concrete tools for service managers who wish to understand and develop the quality of service journeys.

Originality/value

This study advances the service journey concept, demonstrates that the quality of the service journey is a critical driver of customer performance and provides rigorous journey constructs for future service research.

• Service journey
• Customer journey
• Service delivery
• Customer experience
• Service quality
• Service design

Jaakkola, E. and Terho, H. (2021), "Service journey quality: conceptualization, measurement and customer outcomes", Journal of Service Management , Vol. 32 No. 6, pp. 1-27. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOSM-06-2020-0233

Emerald Publishing Limited

Copyright © 2021, Elina Jaakkola and Harri Terho

Published by Emerald Publishing Limited. This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) licence. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this licence may be seen at http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode

1. Introduction

The notion of satisfying customers through service excellence is a cornerstone of service research and practice. During the past decade, managers and researchers alike have increasingly stressed the role of customer journeys as opposed to individual service encounters for the achievement of service excellence and the subsequent competitive advantage ( Rawson et al. , 2013 ). This emphasis aligns with broader marketing research suggesting that the set of touchpoints along the customer journey gives rise to customer experience ( Lemon and Verhoef, 2016 ; Tueanrat et al. , 2021 ). Indeed, a recent industry report suggests that, across industries, companies' journey performance is substantially more strongly correlated with customer satisfaction and business outcomes, such as revenue and repeat purchase, than is firm performance at individual touchpoints ( Duncan et al. , 2016 ).

In the extant marketing literature, the “customer journey” is commonly defined as the series of touchpoints that customers encounter and interact with during their purchase process ( Becker and Jaakkola, 2020 ; Lemon and Verhoef, 2016 ; Becker et al. , 2020 ). In today's markets, customer journeys are ever more complex, as digitalization has accelerated the birth of a myriad of channels through which customers can interact, search for information and conduct their purchases ( Sousa and Voss, 2006 ; Edelman and Singer, 2015 ). What is more, increasing specialization has fragmented the contemporary service delivery to involve a network of providers ( Tax et al. , 2013 ). Firms must therefore manage expectational, operational and functional interdependencies between various touchpoints ( Dhebar, 2013 ), keeping in mind that clumsy and inconsistent journeys have been identified as an important source of customer churn ( Rawson et al. , 2013 ).

The customer journey is a powerful concept for understanding a customer's path to purchase (e.g. Edelman and Singer, 2015 ). However, the purchase decision-making focus is less useful for supporting service management; as in service-intensive contexts, service delivery and consumption encounters play a major role in the formation of customer experiences, accentuating the importance of touchpoints that customers interact with after their purchase decision (see Lemke et al. , 2011 ). Thus, service researchers and practitioners seeking to understand and design high-quality journeys can benefit from journey constructs that capture the functional and operational interdependencies between touchpoints comprising the service process (e.g. Tax et al. , 2013 ; Rawson et al. , 2013 ; Dhebar, 2013 ).

Extant service research offers valuable methods for analyzing and designing the composition of journeys, such as service blueprinting ( Bitner et al. , 2008 ), customer journey mapping ( Zomerdijk and Voss, 2010 ) and multilevel service design ( Patricio et al. , 2011 ), but it lacks the conceptual tools for assessing the quality of service journeys from the customer's viewpoint. This means that managers are missing the tools for measuring to what extent they succeed in designing their journeys for service delivery, and many service organizations continue measuring perceived service quality at particular touchpoints, or rely on simple aggregate measures, such as the Net Promoter Score. Research on customer experience (CX) also considers journeys, but CX measures predominantly focus on customers' perceptions of their overall experience with a brand (e.g. Brakus et al. , 2009 ) or a firm during the purchase process ( Kumar et al. , 2014 ; Kuppelwieser and Klaus, 2021 ), offering limited insights on the touchpoints related to service delivery and consumption that are critical for service-intensive contexts.

Against this background, the purpose of this paper is to conceptualize service journey quality (SJQ), develop measures for the construct and study its customer outcomes . Service journey refers to the process or sequence that a customer goes through to access and use a particular service (cf. Tueanrat et al. , 2021 ; Følstad and Kvale, 2018 ; Voorhees et al. , 2017 ). This study adopts a discovery-oriented approach for conceptualizing SJQ ( Zaltman et al. , 1982 ). First, by synthesizing extant theory (e.g. Homburg et al. , 2017 ; Lemon and Verhoef, 2016 ) and field-based insights from customer focus group discussions, we define SJQ as the degree to which customers perceive the combination of provider-owned service process touchpoints functioning as a (1) seamless, (2) coherent and (3) personalized whole. Second, by building upon the definition and insights from the qualitative study, we develop measures for the SJQ constructs using survey data ( N  = 278) from consumers in the financial services context. Third, we demonstrate the nomological validity and practical relevance of the SJQ constructs by linking them to service quality and customer loyalty using a second survey dataset ( N  = 239) from the financial industry.

This study makes three key contributions. First, the developed conceptualization and measure for SJQ advances extant service research that has, for nearly a decade, highlighted the critical role of journeys (e.g. Zomerdijk and Voss, 2010 ; Ostrom et al. , 2015 ), but offered scant insight into what constitutes the quality of a journey in a service-intensive context. This study develops service process-focused SJQ constructs that capture the key aspects of functional service journeys, putting the emphasis on customer perceptions of the interdependencies between journey touchpoints rather than on individual encounters or the overall evaluation of a firm, thereby complementing current constructs in the area of customer journeys and experience (e.g. Lemke et al. , 2011 ; Kuehnl et al. , 2019 ). Second, this study provides rare empirical support for the notion that the journey quality is a critical driver of customer performance in contemporary service businesses (e.g. Lemon and Verhoef, 2016 ). Specifically, we demonstrate that service journey seamlessness, personalization and coherence are central drivers of customer loyalty intentions. Third, the study clarifies the nomological network of service journeys by providing new insights about the theoretical mechanisms through which journey quality affects loyalty. Earlier research has pointed out that the link between journey quality and loyalty is primarily due to improved brand attitudes ( Kuehnl et al. , 2019 ). Our results show that in service-intensive contexts, the journey-loyalty relationship can furthermore be partially explained through improved service quality perceptions. Since the service quality's mediation effect is only partial, we encourage future research to study more closely the role of other alternative mediators, such as customer experience, in linking SJQ to customer loyalty ( Lemon and Verhoef, 2016 ; Becker and Jaakkola, 2020 ). All in all, this research provides new measures for service design, service management and customer experience research, as well as for managers who wish to set goals, understand and develop their performance in service journeys as a strategic priority.

This paper is organized as follows. The next section outlines the key literature streams that offer the conceptual building blocks for SJQ. The subsequent sections report the empirical research conducted; we first conceptualize SJQ and its key dimensions by synthesizing theory-based views and field-based insights into SJQ, second, develop measures for the construct and finally demonstrate its nomological and predictive validity. The final sections outline the study's theoretical and managerial implications.

2. Conceptual underpinnings of service journey quality

The research that can be drawn from to conceptualize service journey quality is fragmented in multiple literature streams. In the service context, many of the dealings between customers and providers take place after the actual purchase decision has been made as the realization of a service offering often involves both parties. SJQ is hence best understood through literature streams that tackle the various stages of the process that consumers go through when accessing and consuming a service.

Table 1 outlines the key literature fields that offer insight into SJQ. The service management and service design research discuss high-quality service delivery processes; customer experience studies identify strategic journey-related goals for service providers and channel management research provides insights on the design and deployment of diverse channels for effective service processes.

The traditional service management literature has highlighted that customers' quality perceptions are affected not only by what they receive as an outcome of the service but critically also by the functional performance of the service process ( Grönroos, 1984 ). This research has mainly focused on the quality of the core service delivery taking place during the service encounter ( Voorhees et al. , 2017 ), typically examining customer perceptions of either a firm's service excellence at one point in time or their overall experience with the firm (e.g. Parasuraman et al. , 1991 ; Brady and Cronin, 2001 ). The studies considering the service encounter's processual nature have analyzed how positive service outcomes are affected by a particular phase or event of the service process ( Stauss and Weinlich, 1997 ; Verhoef et al. , 2004 ; Sivakumar et al. , 2014 ) or the customer relationship ( Dagger and Sweeney, 2007 ). In other words, service management research mostly focuses on individual service encounters or overall service quality rather than on the journey elements that support the functioning of the service process as a whole.

The literature on service design focuses on the customer-centered innovation of new services by emphasizing the user experience, suggesting methods for analyzing customer journeys and aligning the partners in service delivery (e.g. Karpen et al. , 2017 ; Steen et al. , 2011 ; Yu and Sangiorgi, 2018 ). Methods such as service blueprinting emerged as an attempt to gain a broader view of the service process that comprises both joint service encounters and the steps customers take outside the service setting ( Bitner et al. , 2008 ). Subsequent service design studies have expanded the analysis to include complex systems that customers and users navigate to fulfill their needs (e.g. Patricio et al. , 2011 ; Tax et al. , 2013 ). This stream highlights the importance of designing the journey in a holistic manner and incorporating the entire service delivery network to ensure a consistent service experience (e.g. Tax et al. , 2013 ). Yet, the emphasis lies on offering tools for mapping and developing customer journeys, and these studies do not offer constructs for measuring service journey quality from the customer's perspective.

Customer experience research highlights the importance of journeys by defining the customer experience as “customers' nondeliberate, spontaneous responses and reactions to offering-related stimuli along the customer journey” ( Becker and Jaakkola, 2020 ). Research on customer experience management (CEM) focuses on sellers' activities for strategically designing and managing experiences throughout the customer journey. Homburg et al. (2017) found that best-practice firms have four strategic goals for designing and improving customer journeys: (1) the thematic cohesion of touchpoints, (2) the consistency of touchpoints, (3) the context sensitivity of touchpoints and (4) the connectivity of touchpoints. Kuehnl et al. (2019) found evidence for the first three of these dimensions. These findings offer tentative insights into the relevant dimensions of SJQ. However, the CX research predominantly studies customer purchase journeys, and the only existing consumer-assessed journey design construct by Kuehnl et al. (2019) emphasizes brand-focused journey qualities relating to the brand experience, brand attitudes and customer loyalty. The CX stream has thus paid very limited attention to the functional and operational touchpoint interdependencies that are critical for service contexts ( Rawson et al. , 2013 ; Dhebar, 2013 ).

Finally, research on multichannel customer management addresses “the design, deployment, and evaluation of channels to enhance customer value through effective customer acquisition, retention, and development” ( Neslin et al. , 2006 , p. 96). Customer channels are the medium through which service providers communicate or interact with customers (e.g. call centers, e-mails, SMS, chats and face-to-face conversations) hence representing platforms for digital or human-served touchpoints ( Halvorsrud et al. , 2016 ; Sousa and Voss, 2006 ). The multichannel literature predominantly focuses on channel choice behavior, such as the drivers for online channel use (e.g. Melis et al. , 2015 ), an optimal mix of channels (e.g. Montoya-Weiss et al. , 2003 ) and the role of specific channels during particular phases of the purchase process (e.g. Verhoef et al. , 2007 ). In terms of SJQ, this stream contributes insights into channel properties that attract and guide customers, especially the importance of integrating channels to enable the easy transitioning from one channel to another (e.g. Montoya-Weiss et al. , 2003 ; Neslin et al. , 2006 ; Barwitz and Maas, 2018 ). However, as noted by Anderl et al. (2016) , channel studies tend to either focus on one single channel or consider the interplay of a few selected channels to understand the consumer's path to purchase. This literature reveals little about the quality of the combination of different types of touchpoints located within a range of channels as the focus lies on the channel strategies rather than on the functioning of the journey for service delivery.

As this literature review demonstrates, the issue of understanding and designing service journeys is relevant for many research streams, but the question as to what constitutes SJQ has not been explicitly addressed so far, and the research lacks valid measures on this topic. The research on service management and service design emphasizes the importance of gaining a customer view of the service process, but does not offer tools for understanding and measuring the functional quality of journeys. Customer experience and channel management research, in turn, focuses on the customer purchase journey and offers little insight into the interdependencies between post-purchase touchpoints that are critical for service delivery processes.

3. Conceptualization of service journey quality

To conceptualize SJQ, we applied a discovery-oriented research approach (e.g. Zaltman et al. , 1982 ). By adhering to this approach's established procedures, we build upon our initial insights from a literature review for a theory-based view and complement and refine it with a field-based view. The existing research offers a good basis for forming an initial, theory-based understanding of SJQ, but since existing studies have not addressed journeys specifically from a service process perspective, we conducted a qualitative study on consumers' perceptions of high-quality service journeys to (1) substantiate and (2) enhance and nuance the theory-based view. The conceptualization process was abductive in nature: we moved between theoretical concepts and empirical observations in an iterative fashion ( Dubois and Gadde, 2002 ), resulting in a synthesis of theory and qualitative insights that allowed us to define the SJQ construct and its key dimensions. The conceptual basis established in this phase also forms a robust foundation for the scale development process in the study's latter stages.

3.1 Theory-based view of service journey quality

The first step of the conceptualization process focuses on forming a theory-based view of the SJQ concept's key content. As our literature review demonstrates, research on service process quality and customer journeys can together offer tentative insights into SJQ. First, many studies stress the importance of designing the journey as a whole and integrating touchpoints such that the journey runs smoothly (e.g. Lemon and Verhoef, 2016 ; Homburg et al. , 2017 ; Sousa and Voss, 2006 ). However, due to the increasing functional and operational touchpoint interdependencies of the service processes, mere excellence in individual interactions may not be enough for successful service delivery if the service delivery touchpoints do not align and work in concert (see Rawson et al. , 2013 ).

Second, many authors highlight that touchpoints and their cues should be thematically consistent and coherent along the journey (e.g. Homburg et al. , 2017 ; Kuehnl et al. , 2019 ). Customers experience and evaluate service cues across touchpoints, and with an increasing number of channels and partners involved in service delivery, they may feel lost if the service touchpoints are very dissimilar (cf. Berry et al. , 2006 ).

Third, research emphasizes the individual and subjective nature of journeys, suggesting that they should be sensitive to customers ' individual needs and channel preferences (e.g. Barwitz and Maas, 2018 ; Patricio et al. , 2011 ). High-quality service delivery should therefore adapt to the needs of the individual customer throughout the whole service process (cf. Dhebar, 2013 ). These three themes – touchpoint integration, thematical coherence and sensitivity to individual customer needs – were adopted as the initial theory-based view for SJQ conceptualization, which was refined and complemented with empirical insights from service-intensive contexts.

3.2 A qualitative study for establishing a field-based view of service journey quality

Next, we conducted a qualitative study to generate an understanding of SJQ by drawing from human experiences ( Gioia et al. , 2013 ). Following Sharma and Conduit (2016) , we took the Gioia approach to first conduct open coding to identify themes emerging from data, to capture any SJQ aspects that are relevant for consumers' lived service experiences. In accordance with the abductive approach, we next integrated the first-order codes into second-order, theory-centric themes iterating between the data and the tentative conceptualizations derived from previous research ( Dubois and Gadde, 2002 ). The qualitative data thus served the purpose of substantiating and refining the theory-based view and formulating service process specific definitions for the tentative themes.

3.2.1 Data collection

We employed focus groups to capture consumer insights into SJQ. Focus groups are a suitable data collection means for explorative purposes because the method allows one to gain insights from a large number of individuals through nondirective inquiry strategies that result in a rich understanding of the studied phenomenon ( Flick, 2018 ). We organized nine focus groups of four or five consumers each, and the participants were both female and male and aged between twenty and forty years ( Table 2 ). The aim of selecting focus group participants was to facilitate the open sharing of views and understandings while ensuring that the generated data would be able to meet the research aim's requirements ( King et al. , 2019 ). The participants were university students with differing backgrounds, thus ensuring some common ground, yet a relatively broad range of views.

Each group discussed service journeys in one of the following service contexts: retail, hospitality, teleoperator and insurance services ( Table 2 ). Service delivery in these contexts often features multiple touchpoints, facilitating the gaining of a rich set of insights. The groups were asked to choose one of the four contexts, wherein each participant had some recent dealings. The participants were instructed to discuss their actual experiences of service processes in the chosen context by focusing on experiences they perceived as particularly positive or negative. The participants were asked to describe their service journeys and elaborate upon the aspects that they perceived as the root causes of their positive and/or negative perceptions of the service process. All these procedures aimed to elicit the recall and identification of critical SJQ dimensions in a nonobtrusive way.

3.2.2 Data analysis

Following the Gioia approach ( Gioia et al. , 2013 ), we conducted a thematic analysis on the data, starting with identifying any journey-specific themes mentioned by the focus group participants as relevant to their positive or negative past service experiences; this stage is akin to open coding as conducted in grounded theory ( Strauss and Corbin, 1990 ). Next, we compared and grouped the first-order codes to identify broader second-order themes related to journey quality aspects by iterating between the data and the tentative theory-based conceptualizations. The first-order analysis adhered to the informants' voices, while the second-order analysis developed a higher level of abstraction and used theory-driven insights to determine if and how the first-order themes may be connected and labeled to suggest concepts that explain the observed phenomenon ( Gioia et al. , 2013 ; cf. Sharma and Conduit, 2016 ).

3.3 Conceptualization: synthetizing theory-based view and empirical findings

By synthesizing previous research with findings from qualitative study, we define SJQ as the degree to which customers perceive the combination of provider-owned service process touchpoints functioning as a (1) seamless, (2) coherent and (3) personalized whole. With provider-owned touchpoints, we refer to touchpoints controllable by the service providers, i.e. brand- and partner-owned touchpoints ( Lemon and Verhoef, 2016 ). The rationale is that while modern multichannel service processes may involve a network of service providers and outsourcing partners ( Tax et al. , 2013 ), the customer nevertheless evaluates the process as a whole and often sees each touchpoint representing, and remaining the responsibility of the focal service provider, whether outsourced or not ( Kranzbühler et al. , 2019 ). Thus, the SJQ construct focuses on service delivery touchpoints that service providers are able to design and manage (see Becker and Jaakkola, 2020 ). We identify three key SJQ dimensions: seamlessness, personalization and coherence discussed in detail below.

I hit a car at the parking lot and called my insurance company. Their call center connected my call to the insurance payout services and also transferred my details since the person picking up already knew who I was and why I was calling! She told me what would happen next and helped me pick a repair shop. After the call, I got a text and an email with instructions to the repair shop, and the owner of the other car immediately got a call from my insurance company about his compensation, and I did not have to worry about it at all. (I2)

I had ordered from their online store but I could return items at the [physical] store…that was very convenient, not having to pack and send the clothes that did not fit. (R2)

I was trying to activate my new mobile phone subscription, but it was very difficult. I got a letter that instructed that I should register in one place, then confirm in another site, and then activate it in a third place! The salespersons gave totally different instructions. (T1)

These findings find support in existing research, pinpointing that journey touchpoints should be functionally integrated to enable a smooth end-to-end journey ( Homburg et al. , 2017 ). Edelman and Singer (2015) note that firms should streamline journeys so that customers are able to execute complex service processes quickly and easily; and Rawson et al. (2013) recommend shifting from siloed to cross-functional approaches in developing journeys. Combining the qualitative insights with extant research, we define journey seamlessness as the degree to which touchpoints are integrated allowing a customer ' s smooth transition between various service process touchpoints .

The [mobile phone] service provider sent me an ad to promote its special package for young adults; it looked trendy and playful. The firm was also present in our student event; they organized a funny game and gave away energy drinks…Even their sales reps were cool; they called themselves “social media ninjas”—so everything was about the trendy, bold, and youthful brand… (T1)

It is easy since every Ikea store is almost identical, and it feels the same since you can see Ikea colors all the time…their website looks like Ikea since there is blue and yellow. You also see yellow and blue signs in the stores, and you collect stuff in a yellow bag, and they pack them in a blue bag! (R1)

Different service employees had completely different styles of doing things...So their service principles seem to depend on who you happen to ask! (R3)

These findings resonate with the notion of brand cues' thematic cohesion and consistency across touchpoints (see e.g. Berry et al. , 2006 ; Kuehnl et al. , 2019 ). Previous research on customer experience management has indeed recommended that firms should systematically manage and orchestrate “experience clues” across various touchpoints ( Berry et al. , 2006 ; Zomerdijk and Voss, 2010 ). Synthesizing the qualitative insights with previous research, we define journey coherence as the degree to which service process touchpoints provide consistent experience cues .

We went to a big concert and stayed in a hotel close by. There were many concert attendees staying there, and the hotel had decided to extend the breakfast time the next morning so that we could sleep in after the concert! That seemed like excellent service. ( H2 )

I needed to file an application for compensation for a broken sink in my bathroom. I could've done that online, by phone, or by visiting their office, but I chose the mobile application since I like to do everything with my phone. (I1)

We were two families with small kids traveling together [on a cruise ship] and had booked family cabins. It was really convenient that all the family cabins were located along the same corridor, and party people were at the other end of the ship. Passengers with prams had their own entrance to the ship, and there was a ship mascot greeting us and handing coupons for free ice cream at the play area, our kids loved it! ( H1 )

Also previous research has noted the importance of designing touchpoints that are sensitive to the customer's situational context ( Homburg et al. , 2017 ; Kuehnl et al. , 2019 ), highlighting that customers should find the touchpoint architecture adaptive to their changing needs ( Dhebar, 2013 ). Combining the empirical and research insights, we define journey personalization as the degree to which the combination of service process touchpoints is tailored to fit the customer ' s preferences and situational context.

4. Service journey quality scale development

4.1 qualitative scale development procedure.

The conceptualization of SJQ enabled us to proceed into building measures for the construct. The scale development follows the established procedures for building new scales ( Churchill, 1979 ; MacKenzie et al. , 2011 ). Specifically, on the basis of the construct definitions and insights from the qualitative study, we built an initial indicator pool for all three SJQ constructs, coming up with 23 total indicators that have been designed to evenly reflect the key domain of each SJQ dimension. Next, we assessed the indicator content validity through a qualitative item-sort task test suggested by Anderson and Gerbing (1991) . Twelve senior scholars were asked to assign each scale item under one SJQ construct definitions or option “other” if it could not be accurately assigned to any one definition. All but one indicator received more than ten out of twelve correct responses, thereby passing the suggested threshold criterial of psa (>0.5) and csv (>0.7). When a reviewer felt unclear about or rated an item incorrectly, the indicator was carefully evaluated, and some wordings were consequently fine-tuned. Finally, we selected the six representative indicators from the item sort test for each dimension to sustain the final scale at a reasonable length – see Appendix for the final scale indicators.

4.2 Data collection for the scale validation

To validate the developed measure, we conducted a consumer survey concerning SJQ in financial services where the process of accessing and using the service typically involves a multitude of touchpoints in different channels. The data were collected in a centrally located downtown shopping center in a northern European town. We randomly approached adult customers and asked them to participate in an academic study that concerned their experiences with their primary financial service providers. We implemented a movie ticket draw as an incentive for consumers to participate and guaranteed full anonymity for each respondent and received N  = 278 responses. The data were deemed adequate for the initial scale validation purpose of the first survey study.

4.3 Assessment of the SJQ scale validity and reliability

The SJQ scale validity was assessed based on confirmatory factor analysis using AMOS 24 software. The initial analysis of the proposed three-factor SJQ model with 18 indicators led to the elimination of two items from the seamlessness construct due to problems with discriminant validity. The elimination of problematic items is possible since the reflective indicators are interchangeable and because the construct is unchanged when an indicator is removed ( Bollen and Lennox, 1991 ). A purified three-dimensional model with 16 items demonstrated a satisfactory fit. The chi-square statistic was significant (222.4; p  = 0.00), but the critical ratio of the chi-square over degrees of freedom was close to 2 ( χ 2 /df = 2.2), thus indicating a reasonable fit. The central fit indices provide support for the scale validity: goodness of fit index (GFI) = 0.91; comparative fit index (CFI) = 0.95; Tucker–Lewis index (TLI) = 0.94; standardized root mean residual (SRMR) = 0.042 and root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) = 0.066 [0.054; 0.078] (c.f. Hu and Bentler, 1999 ). All indicator loadings were above 0.70 and significant at p  < 0.01. Figure 1 summarizes the CFA results.

The Fornell and Larcker (1981) test further supports the discriminant validity because the average variance extracted (AVE) values for all constructs exceeded 0.50, and the squared AVE values of each construct exceeded correlations with other constructs. Construct reliabilities were also satisfactory, as all Cronbach's alpha and composite reliability values were higher than 0.70 (see Table 3 for scale details).

Finally, we compared the proposed three-dimensional model against alternative models, including a null model, a single-factor SJQ model and three two-dimensional SJQ models, to further assess the dimensionality of the construct. All alternative models had poor fit (see Table 4 ), thereby supporting the proposed three-dimensional conceptualization of SJQ. All in all, the initial scale validation stage provided support for the validity and reliability of the scales.

5. Nomological and predictive validity of SJQ

5.1 research model and hypotheses.

The study's final stage focused on testing the nomological and predictive validity of each SJQ construct. For this purpose, we identified the two seminal constructs of customer loyalty and service quality from earlier service research, which are conceptually related to SJQ. Figure 2 below presents this study's research model. Next, we discuss the research model and its hypotheses as well as justify the use of composite constructs to test the hypotheses.

Service journey quality has a positive relationship with customer loyalty.

Service journey quality has a positive relationship with service quality.

The relationship between service journey quality and customer loyalty is partially mediated by service quality.

5.2 Use of composite constructs in the research model

Theoretical constructs are not per se multidimensional or unidimensional, but can usually be operationalized either way, thus representing various levels of theoretical abstraction ( Law et al. , 1998 ). SJQ and service quality represent two theoretically distinctive, although complex concepts in the research model, as both possess multiple unique dimensions. Against this background, both constructs can be meaningfully operationalized at a higher level of abstraction by means of second-order composite constructs ( Hair et al. , 2017 ). The use of hierarchical component models offers two important benefits for this study. First, they can notably reduce model complexity by decreasing the number of relationships in the full mediation model, thereby increasing parsimony ( Hair et al. , 2017 , p. 281). Second, although all studied SJQ and service quality constructs are independent by nature, they are likely to correlate with one another due their conceptual closeness concerning quality in service business settings. Establishing a higher-order structure can reduce potential collinearity issues ( Hair et al. , 2017 , p. 281).

Research should always carefully consider specification of the studied constructs because model misspecification can severely bias structural parameter estimates and lead to inappropriate conclusions about the hypothesized relationships between constructs ( Jarvis et al. , 2003 ). We argue that SJQ and service quality are best modeled as first-order reflective, second-order formative (Type II) composite constructs. We build this argument upon the following four criteria that define whether a construct is more efficiently measured by a reflective or formative perspective: (1) causality between the construct and its dimensions, (2) interchangeability of the dimensions, (3) covariation among the dimensions and (4) whether or not all dimensions have the same antecedents and consequences (cf. Jarvis et al. , 2003 , p. 203). The qualitative study suggests that the three SJQ dimensions form the overall level of the construct rather than a uniformly reflect the construct as dropping one dimension would alter the SJQ's conceptualization. Similarly, the dimensions can but are not required to correlate since a service firm might score high in seamlessness, but at the same time fail to provide personalized service encounters. Finally, one may logically expect that the various independent dimensions can have different drivers and outcomes.

5.3 Data collection

The data collection for testing the research model was conducted in collaboration with a Northern European bank that is classified as the second-largest bank in the country wherein the study was conducted. The bank provided us access to its consumers in one of its branches and drew a sample of 4,757 customers from its customer base. A customer experience-labeled survey was sent to the customers in the university's name as an academic survey. A movie ticket draw was used to incentivize the selected customers to participate in the study. All responses were highlighted to be fully confidential, and the respondents were guaranteed full anonymity for their responses. The data collection with two reminders led to N  = 239 customer responses. The respondents' characteristics are summarized in Table 5 .

5.4 Measures

We employed established scales for all the constructs in the research model. Specifically, we measured customer loyalty using the scale by Zeithaml et al. (1996) , service quality with the measure developed by Cronin and Taylor (1992) and SJQ with the developed scale. In addition, since the study relied on a single-respondent design, we included a common method variance (CMV) marker variable to the questionnaire. For this purpose, we used an a-priori “Consumer Orientation Toward Sporting Events” scale developed by Pons et al. (2006) with four indicators and no nomological relationship with other study constructs, as recommended by the established guidelines ( Lindell and Whitney, 2001 ; Chin et al. , 2013 ).

5.5 Analytical procedures

Since the maximum-likelihood-based SEM is problematic for testing models with formative constructs, we analyzed the research model with PLS modeling using the SmartPLS3.0 software ( Hair et al. , 2012 ). This method is closely suited to studies that build upon formative constructs and complex models with higher-order constructs and mediation effects. We implemented the guidelines established by Hair et al. (2012) to estimate the research model. The modeling of second-order composite constructs follows the guidelines of Becker et al. (2012) as well as Cadogan and Lee (2013) . Specifically, the simulation study conducted by Becker et al. (2012) demonstrates that reflective-formative, hierarchical type II constructs are most effectively modeled by the repeated indicator approach, path weighting scheme and mode B measurement. We further tested the SJQ construct's relationship with the second-order formative service quality construct through its lower-order dimensions (see Figure 2 ), which represents a conceptually superior way to estimate antecedent relations for formative constructs ( Cadogan and Lee, 2013 ). To account for the total effects on service quality, the explained variance in each dimension was multiplied by its weight, and the individual contributions of each dimension were added together ( Becker et al. , 2012 ). The statistical significance of the PLS parameter estimates were tested with a bootstrapping procedure based on 5,000 subsamples. For clarity, we estimated the research model in two parts; we first estimated a simple baseline model with exclusively direct relationships between SJQ and customer loyalty and second, estimated a full model with the service quality construct as a mediator.

5.6 Common method variance

Because the study relies on a single-respondent design, common method variance (CMV) must be taken into account. We relied on both procedural and statistical approaches to assess and control CMV as recommended by Podsakoff et al. (2003) . The procedural means include respondents' guaranteed anonymity, careful scale item development for added clarity and the use of different scale anchors for IV and DV. We also used several statistical means to assess CMV. First, Harman's single-factor test produced seven factors with eigenvalues greater in an un-rotated factor analysis and no single factor explained above 50% of the covariance. Second, we applied Lindell and Whitney's (2001) partial correlation technique to assess the magnitude of CMV effects in construct correlations. Importantly, the marker variable was found to have low (0.06–0.12) and insignificant relationships with other study constructs (see Table 6 ), while the specific data analysis procedures (see Lindell and Whitney, 2001 ) did not exhibit any substantial changes in their correlation coefficients or their significance when controlling for the CMV marker variable. Finally, we applied a measured latent marker variable approach when testing our research model, which has been proven to effectively detect and correct CMV in a PLS analysis (see Chin et al. , 2013 ). Specifically, our full research model includes separate CMV marker variables for all constructs in the model (see Figure 2 ). All marker variable paths were again close to zero and insignificant (see Table 7 for full details). Importantly, the marker variable's inclusion in the model did not change path coefficients or significances; overall, the results indicate that a common method bias is not a major problem for this study.

5.7 Testing the research model and hypotheses

We began testing the research model by assessing the scale validities and reliabilities. The outer model results show that all standardized indicator loadings exceeded the recommended threshold of 0.70 and were all significant at the p  < 0.01 level (see Appendix ). The construct reliabilities were supported, as all Cronbach's alpha and composite reliability values were higher than 0.70. Convergent and discriminant validity were supported because all AVEs were higher than 0.50 and because the AVE's square root exceeded the construct correlations (see Table 6 for scale details). The scale correlations were high, although closely aligned with earlier service quality research findings that have found key service quality constructs and customer performance outcomes to be tightly interrelated ( Brady and Cronin, 2001 ; Dagger and Sweeney, 2007 ). The correlations are also theoretically meaningful since all the studied constructs measured diverse aspects of service performance, including service journey quality, overall service quality and customer loyalty. Finally, a separate test of PLS cross-loadings confirmed that all indicators loaded highest on the construct that they were intended to measure ( Hair et al. , 2012 ).

The inner model evaluation also supported the quality of the model. We examined VIF values of the first-order constructs in relation to higher-order formative constructs and concluded that all values were below the suggested threshold of 5 ( Hair et al. , 2012 ).

The structural model results provide support for all three hypotheses. First, the direct effect model confirms that the developed SJQ measure has a strong, positive relationship with customer loyalty, thus supporting H1 (see Table 7 ). Specifically, the second-order SJQ construct had a path coefficient of 0.76** for loyalty in the direct effect model, thus explaining 60% of its variance. All first-order dimensions had positive and significant weights: personalization (0.40**), coherence (0.38**) and seamlessness (0.29*), thus supporting the predictive validity of all three dimensions for customer performance. The first-order path coefficients to the second-order constructs can be interpreted similarly to formative indicator weights – that is, by indicating the relative contribution of the lower-order construct to the higher-order construct while predicting outcomes in the studied nomological network ( Becker et al. , 2012 ).

Second, the full structural model results support the second hypothesis that SJQ is a central enabler of service quality in today's complex business environment. Interestingly, SJQ was positively related to all dimensions of service quality: reliability (0.85**), assurance (0.73**), tangibles (0.68**), empathy (0.65**) and responsiveness (0.57**). Yet, only two first-order dimensions of service quality contributed significantly to the second-order construct when predicting loyalty. By calculating the total indirect effects ( Becker et al. , 2012 ), SJQ explains 53% of the variance in service quality.

Third, the full mediation model results also support the partial mediation of H3 because the relationship between SJQ and customer loyalty became weaker, yet remained significant when controlling for the service quality mediation link. A separate, bootstrapping-based Preacher Hayes mediation analysis confirms the significance of the hypothesized partial mediation (see Table 8 ).

Specifically, when controlling for the service quality link, SJQ's direct effect on customer loyalty (0.26**) remained substantial and highly significant. SJQ also had a strong indirect effect (0.50**) on customer loyalty through the service quality link. Interestingly, SJQ's total effect on loyalty (0.76**) due to its direct and indirect effects was stronger than service quality's effect on loyalty (0.58**). Finally, a closer look at the dimension weights of the second-order constructs provides insight into the relative importance of the dimensions in the broader nomological network. When broadening the study focus to the full research model with both service quality and loyalty as dependent variables, the SJQ dimension weights slightly changed as the relative impact of personalization (0.56**) and seamlessness (0.28**) became more important compared to coherence (0.21*). In line with earlier findings in banking contexts (see Bloemer et al. , 1998 ; Choudhury, 2013 ), reliability (0.70**) is the dominating dimension of service quality when predicting customer loyalty. Beyond reliability, the tangibles (0.18*) represent the only other significant 2nd order service quality dimension.

6. Contributions and implications

6.1 theoretical implications.

This research responds to calls for the development of a more thorough understanding of what makes service journeys excellent and supportive of superior customer outcomes ( Ostrom et al. , 2015 ), as well as to the managerial need for easily applicable tools for measuring performance in service delivery through complex journeys. The customer journey is considered a key concept for understanding the emergence of customer experiences (e.g. Lemon and Verhoef, 2016 ), but extant research has overlooked the development of this concept to fully capture the essence of service processes. This paper informs research and managerial practice by conceptualizing SJQ, developing measures for the construct and studying its relationship with service quality and customer loyalty. Extant journey research spans various literature fields ( Table 1 ), thus rendering the findings relevant for many areas of service research. This study makes three main contributions, which are discussed in detail below.

First, the conceptualization and measure development for SJQ offers researchers constructs that capture the key aspects of functional customer journeys from the service process point of view. This contributes to the service management and experience research by moving the focus from individual encounters or overall service or brand evaluations (e.g. Parasuraman et al. , 1991 ; Brakus et al. , 2009 ; Lemke et al. , 2011 ; Kumar et al. , 2014 ) to the potentially multichannel and multiprovider service journeys as whole. As such, the SJQ construct provides a modern service quality tool that tackles service delivery through complex journeys, whose quality cannot be exclusively understood as an aggregate sum of individual service encounters ( Rawson et al. , 2013 ). For service design research, the SJQ construct offers a set of concrete goals for designing journeys to ensure that cues and touchpoints operate in concert and allow for personalized configurations, and it enables the measuring of to what degree these designed journey qualities are achieved. For customer experience research, SJQ offers a journey conceptualization that captures the key elements that affect CX formation in service-intensive contexts. This supports customer experience management ( Homburg et al. , 2017 ) and complements the constructs developed by Kuehnl et al. (2019) that link brand-focused journey qualities to brand attitudes, brand experiences and loyalty, but scarcely address the operational and functional touchpoint interdependencies relevant for service processes. For multichannel customer management research, the SJQ construct provides a tool for analyzing the performance of channel integration in service-intensive contexts, complementing the existing journey perspective that is purchase-process focused.

This study's second contribution is in confirming that SJQ is a critical driver of customer performance in contemporary service businesses. Specifically, we demonstrate that service journey seamlessness, personalization and coherence act as central drivers for both perceived service quality and customer loyalty intentions. The positive connection between the quality of journeys and service quality is intuitive, yet no earlier study has demonstrated this link. This study's findings indicate that customers' overall service quality assessments are affected by their perceptions of how successfully various service delivery touchpoints operate in concert. This link is evident even though many service quality dimensions focus on personal interactions at a single encounter. It is likely that encounters at earlier stages of the service journey build expectations that affect the customer's interpretation of later service encounters. In other words, high-quality journeys reduce negative surprises and enable the consistent meeting of customer expectations, which builds better service quality perceptions. Thus, this study demonstrates that SJQ represents an important service quality enabler and provides evidence for the assumption that, in today's multichannel, digitalized markets, service excellence warrants the perfection of service journeys (cf. Halvorsrud et al. , 2016 ; Lemon and Verhoef, 2016 ). This finding is underscored by the empirical finding that SJQ has a stronger total effect on customer loyalty than on service quality.

Finally, this study contributes to the existing literature by clarifying the nomological network of service journeys and the theoretical mechanisms through which journey quality affects loyalty. Our findings reveal that service quality mediates the direct relationship between SJQ and customer loyalty. In other words, improved service quality represents a central mechanism that explains why high-quality journeys can help secure more loyal customers. This result complements earlier studies that have attributed the link between journey quality and loyalty primarily to improved brand attitudes ( Kuehnl et al. , 2019 ). However, this mediation is merely partial, thus indicating that SJQ contributes to customer loyalty above and beyond service quality when controlling for the mediation link. This finding is of great importance because it indicates that the relationship between SJQ and customer loyalty cannot be explained by improved service quality perceptions alone, but there may be other potential mediators as well, such as customer experience (see Lemon and Verhoef, 2016 ; Becker and Jaakkola, 2020 ). This proposition is discussed further in the implications for future research section.

In sum, this research provides new measures for service research, as well as for managers who wish to set goals, understand and develop their performance in service journeys. This study is among the first to develop the concept of service journeys to capture the nature of the process customers go through to access and use offerings in service-intensive contexts, in order to complement the customer journey concept that is predominantly anchored in the consumer decision-making process. In doing so, this study helps organize the pieces of the customer experience and journey puzzle by clarifying and nuancing the nomological network of some of these key concepts of contemporary service research.

6.2 Managerial implications

Contemporary service businesses rely increasingly on numerous interconnected online and personal service delivery channels, as well as diverse partners, in providing a service. This means that firms need to consider and manage various expectational, operational and functional interdependencies between various service delivery touchpoints ( Dhebar, 2013 ). While service design tools, such as blueprinting, have been developed to help in designing functional service journeys, very few tools have been developed for assessing the quality of service journeys from the customer's viewpoint. This is problematic because measuring perceived service quality at individual touchpoints says little about the quality of the service process as a whole, and simple aggregate measures, such as the Net Promoter Score, do not reveal the cause of customer satisfaction or dissatisfaction. This study develops constructs to assess customer-perceived SJQ and provides empirical evidence for the relevance of high-quality service journeys, demonstrating that consumers' SJQ perceptions drive both service quality and customer loyalty. These findings indicate that service providers should invest in the development and monitoring of SJQ instead of just focusing on individual service encounters or overall satisfaction.

Specifically, our results highlight that service journey quality from the customer's perspective is determined by the three key dimensions of journey seamlessness, coherence and personalization. These SJQ dimensions provide managers concrete goals in designing their service journeys. First, journey seamlessness requires that the various provider and partner-controlled touchpoints along the service process are integrated and aligned so that the customer can smoothly transition between the touchpoints, whether outsourced or not. Second, journey coherence can be achieved by thematically integrating all touchpoints and the related “experience cues” to provide a consistent impression of the firm or the brand throughout all service encounters. Third, journey personalization stresses the tailoring of the combination of service process touchpoints to fit the customer's service delivery preferences and the customer's situation. Firms can use the SJQ measures developed in this study to analyze, monitor and develop the quality of their service journeys, as well as to set collaboration and quality goals for partners (see Appendix ).

The three SJQ dimensions can also be used to analyze the functionality of customer relationship models for different customer segments that typically follow distinct journeys (e.g. when customer segments are served through different service channels). Measuring SJQ perceived by different customer segments helps the internal benchmarking of journeys, in order to reveal potential pain points in different journeys and improve performance, particularly for mass segments wherein the customers navigate their journeys independently. We also urge companies to assess whether or not SJQ might be a source of differentiation and thereby a competitive advantage in their industry and to develop their journeys accordingly.

6.3 Limitations and implications for future research

This study naturally has some limitations. Noteworthy is that the SJQ construct does not capture social and customer-owned touchpoints that are outside a firm's influence ( Lemon and Verhoef, 2016 ; Becker et al. , 2020 ), but instead focuses on provider- and partner-owned touchpoints, i.e. the parts of the journey that firms can seek to manage ( Becker and Jaakkola, 2020 ). Furthermore, as the SJQ construct focuses on the quality of the service process, it does not cover what the customer receives as the outcome of the service. Therefore, when the aim is to study both technical and functional quality ( Grönroos, 1984 ), the SJQ construct should be used together with complementary measures.

While the conceptualization builds upon a broad empirical basis that includes a qualitative study and two quantitative studies, further research related to the SJQ construct's nomological network is needed. This study has identified initial evidence that service journey quality predicts customer loyalty, but those findings were based on a single-respondent study design with subjective performance measures. Future research should confirm the findings using stronger research designs with objective performance measures and multiple-respondent study designs. Also, since the quantitative study findings are based on data exclusively from the financial sector, future research should investigate the relative importance of the construct dimensions and test the results' generalizability in other empirical contexts. We assume that the developed measure is applicable across service-intensive industries, but this assumption warrants further research. Researchers could study not only brand-focused contexts, such as tourism and hospitality but also contexts such as healthcare, public services, and B2B settings, wherein more functional interdependencies between touchpoints should be a key. Future studies could also examine the SJQ construct's application to experience-centric and hedonic versus mundane services, as well as to different types of journeys.

We call for a systematic research effort that focuses on SJQ and its antecedents, outcomes, mediators and moderators. Various areas of service research – including service management, service design and customer experience management – should more closely study which marketing activities drive seamless, coherent and personalized service journeys. On the outcome side, future research should study SJQ's effects on objective performance and examine whether or not improved customer experience also mediates the performance link. The role of experiential outcomes is emphasized by the study finding that the SJQ-loyalty link is not fully mediated by service quality improvements. Since customer experience refers to customers' nondeliberate, spontaneous responses and reactions to offering-related stimuli along the customer journey ( Becker and Jaakkola, 2020 ), high-quality service journeys should logically be connected to positive customer experiences. Due to the complexity of the customer experience phenomenon, its measurement is challenging. Advances in this area can offer the means to study the suggested experience link in more detail (e.g. the EXQ measure by Kuppelwieser and Klaus, 2021 ), in order to clarify whether and how service journey quality relates to customer experiences. Finally, we call for research attention on the key moderators – that is, those conditions that either strengthen or weaken SJQ's antecedent and outcome sides in different contexts.

Confirmatory factor analysis of the three-factor SJQ scale

Research model

Connection of the Service Journey Quality concept to extant journey literature

Focus groups

Scale properties and correlations – scale validation sample 1

Respondent characteristics

Scale details for the full research model

Scale details

Note(s) : a Seven-point Likert-scale, anchored by 1- “strongly disagree” and 7- “strongly agree”

b Seven-point rating scale concerning likelihood, anchored by 1- “very unlikely”, 7- “very likely”

c Deleted items

* p  < 0.01

Anderl , E. , Schumann , J.H. and Kunz , W. ( 2016 ), “ Helping firms reduce complexity in multichannel online data: a new taxonomy-based approach for customer journeys ”, Journal of Retailing , Vol. 92 No. 2 , pp. 185 - 203 .

Anderson , J. and Gerbing , D. ( 1991 ), “ Predicting the performance of measures in a confirmatory factor analysis with a pretest assessment of their substantive validities ”, Journal of Applied Psychology , Vol. 76 No. 5 , pp. 732 - 740 .

Banerjee , M. ( 2014 ), “ Misalignment and its influence on integration quality in multichannel services ”, Journal of Service Research , Vol. 17 No. 4 , pp. 460 - 474 .

Barwitz , N. and Maas , P. ( 2018 ), “ Understanding the Omnichannel customer journey: determinants of interaction choice ”, Journal of Interactive Marketing , Vol. 43 , pp. 116 - 133 .

Becker , L. and Jaakkola , E. ( 2020 ), “ Customer experience: fundamental premises and implications for research ”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science , Vol. 48 No. 4 , pp. 630 - 648 .

Becker , J.-M. , Klein , K. and Wetzels , M. ( 2012 ), “ Hierarchical latent variable models in PLS-SEM: guidelines for using reflective-formative type models ”, Long Range Planning , Vol. 45 Nos 5-6 , pp. 359 - 394 .

Becker , L. , Jaakkola , E. and Halinen , A. ( 2020 ), “ Toward a goal-oriented view of customer journeys ”, Journal of Service Management , Vol. 31 No. 4 , pp. 767 - 790 .

Bendoly , E. , Blocher , J.D. , Bretthauer , K.M. , Krishnan , S. and Venkataramanan , M.A. ( 2005 ), “ Online/in-store integration and customer retention ”, Journal of Service Research , Vol. 7 No. 4 , pp. 313 - 327 .

Berry , L.L. , Wall , E.A. and Carbone , L.P. ( 2006 ), “ Service clues and customer assessment of the service experience: lessons from marketing ”, The Academy of Management Perspectives , Vol. 20 No. 2 , pp. 43 - 57 .

Bitner , M.J. , Ostrom , A.L. and Morgan , F.N. ( 2008 ), “ Service blueprinting: a practical technique for service innovation ”, California Management Review , Vol. 50 No. 3 , pp. 66 - 94 .

Bloemer , J. , De Ruyter , K. and Peeters , P. ( 1998 ), “ Investigating drivers of bank loyalty: the complex relationship between image, service quality and satisfaction ”, International Journal of Bank Marketing , Vol. 16 No. 7 , pp. 276 - 286 .

Bollen , K. and Lennox , R. ( 1991 ), “ Conventional wisdom on measurement: a structural equation perspective ”, Psychological Bulletin , Vol. 110 No. 2 , p. 305 .

Brady , M.K. and Cronin , J.J. Jr ( 2001 ), “ Some new thoughts on conceptualizing perceived service quality: a hierarchical approach ”, Journal of Marketing , Vol. 65 No. 3 , pp. 34 - 49 .

Brakus , J.J. , Schmitt , B.H. and Zarantonello , L. ( 2009 ), “ Brand experience: what is it? How is it measured? Does it affect loyalty? ”, Journal of Marketing , Vol. 73 No. 3 , pp. 52 - 68 .

Cadogan , J. and Lee , N. ( 2013 ), “ Improper use of endogenous formative variables ”, Journal of Business Research , Vol. 66 No. 2 , pp. 233 - 241 .

Chin , W. , Thatcher , J. , Wright , R. and Steel , D. ( 2013 ), “ Controlling for common method variance in PLS analysis: the measured latent marker variable approach ”, New Perspectives in Partial Least Squares and Related Methods , Springer , New York, NY , pp. 231 - 239 .

Choudhury , K. ( 2013 ), “ Service quality and customers' purchase intentions: an empirical study of the Indian banking sector ”, International Journal of Bank Marketing , Vol. 31 No. 7 , pp. 529 - 543 .

Churchill , G. Jr ( 1979 ), “ A paradigm for developing better measures of marketing constructs ”, Journal of Marketing Research , Vol. 16 No. 1 , pp. 64 - 73 .

Cronin , J. Jr and Taylor , S. ( 1992 ), “ Measuring service quality: a reexamination and extension ”, Journal of Marketing , Vol. 56 No. 3 , pp. 55 - 68 .

Dagger , T.S. and Sweeney , J.C. ( 2007 ), “ Service quality attribute weights: how do novice and longer-term customers construct service quality perceptions? ”, Journal of Service Research , Vol. 10 No. 1 , pp. 22 - 42 .

Dhebar , A. ( 2013 ), “ Toward a compelling customer touchpoint architecture ”, Business Horizons , Vol. 56 No. 2 , pp. 199 - 205 .

Dubois , A. and Gadde , L.E. ( 2002 ), “ Systematic combining: an abductive approach to case research ”, Journal of Business Research , Vol. 55 No. 7 , pp. 553 - 560 .

Duncan , E. , Fanderl , H. , Maechler , N. and Neher , K. ( 2016 ), “ Customer experience: creating value through transforming customer journeys ”, available at : https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/marketing-and-sales/our-insights/customer-experience-creating-value-through-transforming-customer-journeys ( accessed 15 May 2020 ).

Edelman , D.C. and Singer , M. ( 2015 ), “ Competing on customer journeys ”, Harvard Business Review , Vol. 93 No. 11 , pp. 88 - 100 .

Flick , U. ( 2018 ), An Introduction to Qualitative Research , Sage Publications , London .

Følstad , A. and Kvale , K. ( 2018 ), “ Customer journeys: a systematic literature review ”, Journal of Service Theory and Practice , Vol. 28 No. 2 , pp. 196 - 227 .

Fornell , C. and Larcker , D. ( 1981 ), “ Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error ”, Journal of Marketing Research , Vol. 18 No. 1 , pp. 39 - 50 .

Gioia , D.A. , Corley , K.G. and Hamilton , A.L. ( 2013 ), “ Seeking qualitative rigor in inductive research: notes on the Gioia methodology ”, Organizational Research Methods , Vol. 16 No. 1 , pp. 15 - 31 .

Grönroos , C. ( 1984 ), “ A service quality model and its marketing implications ”, European Journal of Marketing , Vol. 18 No. 4 , pp. 36 - 44 .

Hair , J.F. , Sarstedt , M. , Ringle , C.M. and Mena , J.A. ( 2012 ), “ An assessment of the use of partial least squares structural equation modeling in marketing research ”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science , Vol. 40 No. 3 , pp. 414 - 433 .

Hair , J.F. Jr , Hult , G.T.M. , Ringle , C. and Sarstedt , M. ( 2017 ), A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) , 2nd ed. , Sage publications , Los Angeles .

Halvorsrud , R. , Kvale , K. and Følstad , A. ( 2016 ), “ Improving service quality through customer journey analysis ”, Journal of Service Theory and Practice , Vol. 26 No. 6 , pp. 840 - 867 .

Homburg , C. , Jozić , D. and Kuehnl , C. ( 2017 ), “ Customer experience management: toward implementing an evolving marketing concept ”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science , Vol. 45 No. 3 , pp. 377 - 401 .

Hu , L. and Bentler , P.M. ( 1999 ), “ Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives ”, Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal , Vol. 6 No. 1 , pp. 1 - 55 .

Jarvis , C.B. , MacKenzie , S.B. and Podsakoff , P.M. ( 2003 ), “ A critical review of construct indicators and measurement model misspecification in marketing and consumer research ”, Journal of Consumer Research , Vol. 30 No. 2 , pp. 199 - 218 .

Karpen , I.O. , Gemser , G. and Calabretta , G. ( 2017 ), “ A multilevel consideration of service design conditions: towards a portfolio of organisational capabilities, interactive practices and individual abilities ”, Journal of Service Theory and Practice , Vol. 27 No. 2 , pp. 384 - 407 .

King , N. , Horrocks , C. and Brooks , J. ( 2019 ), Interviews in Qualitative Research , SAGE Publications , London .

Kranzbühler , A.M. , Kleijnen , M.H. and Verlegh , P.W. ( 2019 ), “ Outsourcing the pain, keeping the pleasure: effects of outsourced touchpoints in the customer journey ”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science , Vol. 47 No. 2 , pp. 308 - 327 .

Kuehnl , C. , Jozic , D. and Homburg , C. ( 2019 ), “ Effective customer journey design: consumers' conception, measurement, and consequences ”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science , Vol. 47 No. 3 , pp. 551 - 568 .

Kumar , V. , Umashankar , N. , Kim , K.H. and Bhagwat , Y. ( 2014 ), “ Assessing the influence of economic and customer experience factors on service purchase behaviors ”, Marketing Science , Vol. 33 No. 5 , pp. 673 - 692 .

Kuppelwieser , V.G. and Klaus , P. ( 2021 ), “ Measuring customer experience quality: the EXQ scale revisited ”, Journal of Business Research , Vol. 126 , pp. 624 - 633 .

Law , K.S. , Wong , C.S. and Mobley , W.M. ( 1998 ), “ Toward a taxonomy of multidimensional constructs ”, Academy of Management Review , Vol. 23 No. 4 , pp. 741 - 755 .

Lemke , F. , Clark , M. and Wilson , H. ( 2011 ), “ Customer experience quality: an exploration in business and consumer contexts using repertory grid technique ”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science , Vol. 39 No. 6 , pp. 846 - 869 .

Lemon , K.N. and Verhoef , P.C. ( 2016 ), “ Understanding customer experience throughout the customer journey ”, Journal of Marketing , Vol. 80 No. 6 , pp. 69 - 96 .

Lindell , M.K. and Whitney , D.J. ( 2001 ), “ Accounting for common method variance in cross-sectional research designs ”, Journal of Applied Psychology , Vol. 86 No. 1 , p. 114 .

MacKenzie , S. , Podsakoff , P. and Podsakoff , N. ( 2011 ), “ Construct measurement and validation procedures in MIS and behavioral research: integrating new and existing techniques ”, MIS Quarterly , Vol. 35 No. 2 , pp. 293 - 334 .

Melis , K. , Campo , K. , Breugelmans , E. and Lamey , L. ( 2015 ), “ The impact of the multi-channel retail mix on online store choice: does online experience matter? ”, Journal of Retailing , Vol. 91 No. 2 , pp. 272 - 288 .

Montoya-Weiss , M.M. , Voss , G.B. and Grewal , D. ( 2003 ), “ Determinants of online channel use and overall satisfaction with a relational, multichannel service provider ”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science , Vol. 31 No. 4 , pp. 448 - 458 .

Neslin , S.A. , Grewal , D. , Leghorn , R. , Shankar , V. , Teerling , M.L. , Thomas , J.S. and Verhoef , P.C. ( 2006 ), “ Challenges and opportunities in multichannel customer management ”, Journal of Service Research , Vol. 9 No. 2 , pp. 95 - 112 .

Ostrom , A.L. , Parasuraman , A. , Bowen , D.E. , Patrício , L. and Voss , C.A. ( 2015 ), “ Service research priorities in a rapidly changing context ”, Journal of Service Research , Vol. 18 No. 2 , pp. 127 - 159 .

Parasuraman , A. , Berry , L.L. and Zeithaml , V.A. ( 1991 ), “ Refinement and reassessment of the SERVQUAL scale ”, Journal of Retailing , Vol. 67 No. 4 , pp. 420 - 450 .

Patrício , L. , Fisk , R.P. , Falcão e Cunha , J. and Constantine , L. ( 2011 ), “ Multilevel service design: from customer value constellation to service experience blueprinting ”, Journal of Service Research , Vol. 14 No. 2 , pp. 180 - 200 .

Podsakoff , P.M. , MacKenzie , S.B. , Lee , J.-Y. and Podsakoff , N.P. ( 2003 ), “ Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies ”, Journal of Applied Psychology , Vol. 88 No. 5 , pp. 879 - 903 .

Pons , F. , Mourali , M. and Nyeck , S. ( 2006 ), “ Consumer orientation toward sporting events: scale development and validation ”, Journal of Service Research , Vol. 8 No. 3 , pp. 276 - 287 .

Rawson , A. , Duncan , E. and Jones , C. ( 2013 ), “ The truth about customer experience ”, Harvard Business Review , Vol. 91 No. 9 , pp. 90 - 98 .

Sharma , S. and Conduit , J. ( 2016 ), “ Cocreation culture in health care organizations ”, Journal of Service Research , Vol. 19 No. 4 , pp. 438 - 457 .

Sivakumar , K. , Li , M. and Dong , B. ( 2014 ), “ Service quality: the impact of frequency, timing, proximity, and sequence of failures and delights ”, Journal of Marketing , Vol. 78 No. 1 , pp. 41 - 58 .

Sousa , R. and Voss , C.A. ( 2006 ), “ Service quality in multichannel services employing virtual channels ”, Journal of Service Research , Vol. 8 No. 4 , pp. 356 - 371 .

Stauss , B. and Weinlich , B. ( 1997 ), “ Process‐oriented measurement of service quality: applying the sequential incident technique ”, European Journal of Marketing , Vol. 31 No. 1 , pp. 33 - 55 .

Steen , M. , Manschot , M. and de Koning , N. ( 2011 ), “ Benefits of co-design in service design projects ”, International Journal of Design , Vol. 5 No. 2 , pp. 53 - 60 .

Strauss , A. and Corbin , J. ( 1990 ), Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques , Sage Publications , Newbury Park, California .

Tax , S.S. , McCutcheon , D. and Wilkinson , I.F. ( 2013 ), “ The service delivery network (SDN): a customer-centric perspective of the customer journey ”, Journal of Service Research , Vol. 16 No. 4 , pp. 454 - 470 .

Tueanrat , Y. , Papagiannidis , S. and Alamanos , E. ( 2021 ), “ Going on a journey: a review of the customer journey literature ”, Journal of Business Research , Vol. 125 , pp. 336 - 353 .

Verhoef , P.C. , Antonides , G. and de Hoog , A.N. ( 2004 ), “ Service encounters as a sequence of events: the importance of peak experiences ”, Journal of Service Research , Vol. 7 No. 1 , pp. 53 - 64 .

Verhoef , P.C. , Neslin , S.A. and Vroomen , B. ( 2007 ), “ Multichannel customer management: understanding the research-shopper phenomenon ”, International Journal of Research in Marketing , Vol. 24 No. 2 , pp. 129 - 148 .

Voorhees , C.M. , Fombelle , P.W. , Gregoire , Y. , Bone , S. , Gustafsson , A. , Sousa , R. and Walkowiak , T. ( 2017 ), “ Service encounters, experiences and the customer journey: defining the field and a call to expand our lens ”, Journal of Business Research , Vol. 79 , pp. 269 - 280 .

Yu , E. and Sangiorgi , D. ( 2018 ), “ Service design as an approach to implement the value cocreation perspective in new service development ”, Journal of Service Research , Vol. 21 No. 1 , pp. 40 - 58 .

Zaltman , G. , LeMasters , K. and Heffring , M. ( 1982 ), Theory Construction in Marketing: Some Thoughts on Thinking , John Wiley and Sons , New York .

Zeithaml , V.A. , Berry , L.L. and Parasuraman , A. ( 1996 ), “ The behavioral consequences of service quality ”, Journal of Marketing , Vol. 60 No. 2 , pp. 31 - 46 .

Zomerdijk , L.G. and Voss , C.A. ( 2010 ), “ Service design for experience-centric services ”, Journal of Service Research , Vol. 13 No. 1 , pp. 67 - 82 .

Corresponding author

About the authors.

Elina Jaakkola is Professor of Marketing at Turku School of Economics, University of Turku, Finland. Her research interests focus on value creation, customer/actor engagement, customer experience, service innovation, and knowledge intensive business services and solutions. Her research has been published in a wide range of journals and book chapters, for example Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Journal of Product Innovation Management, Journal of Service Research, Industrial Marketing Management, Journal of Service Management, Journal of Business Research, and AMS Review.

Harri Terho is Adjunct Professor and Senior Research Fellow in Marketing at Turku School of Economics, University of Turku, Finland. His research interests focus on value creation in business markets, selling and sales management, the role of technology in marketing and sales, as well as B2B customer experiences and journeys. His research has been published in Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Industrial Marketing Management, Journal of Business Research, Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management, Journal of Business-to-Business Marketing, and Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing among others.

Related articles

All feedback is valuable.

Please share your general feedback

Report an issue or find answers to frequently asked questions

Contact Customer Support