Abstract
Orientation: Digital transformation has reconfigured customer-firm interaction in automotive retail, shifting service encounters towards hybrid digital-physical journeys.
Research purpose: This study examines whether the satisfaction-trust-commitment mechanism proposed by commitment-trust theory remains valid in digitally enabled dealership contexts and whether perceived service innovation conditions these relational pathways.
Motivation for the study: Most relationship quality research continues to reflect pre-digital, high-contact environments.
Research design, approach and method: A cross-sectional survey of 463 South African automotive customers was analysed using covariance-based structural equation modelling (AMOS). Data were collected between November 2024 and April 2025. Validated multi-item scales measured satisfaction, trust, commitment and perceived service innovation. Moderation was assessed using a latent interaction term.
Main findings: Satisfaction significantly strengthens trust, with both constructs predicting commitment, confirming the robustness of the commitment-trust theory in hybrid service environments. Trust partially mediates the satisfaction-commitment relationship. Perceived service innovation functions as a contextual, rather than a relational mechanism, indicating that customers evaluate technological and relational value through separate cognitive pathways.
Practical/managerial implications: This study refines digital relationship marketing theory by establishing a boundary condition, namely that perceived service innovation does not alter core relational mechanisms. This conceptual clarity advances understanding of how digital tools integrate within hybrid service ecosystems. Managerially, the findings demonstrate that technological upgrades alone cannot compensate for weak relational foundations. Dealerships must pair digital process efficiency with transparent communication, reliable service delivery and consistent interpersonal engagement to strengthen trust and sustain long-term commitment.
Contribution/value-add: This study proved that digital and interpersonal cues jointly inform satisfaction and trust.
Keywords: automotive retail; digital service innovation; relationship marketing; service-dominant logic; customer satisfaction; customer trust; customer commitment.
Introduction
The automotive retail sector today plays a critical role in South Africa’s economy, contributing approximately 5.2% to the gross domestic product, 22.6% of national manufacturing output and supporting nearly 498 000 jobs across the formal economy (National Association of Automobile Manufacturers of South Africa [NAAMSA] 2025, 2026). Dealerships remain the primary channel for new vehicle sales, accounting for nearly 80% of all transactions, with domestic sales increasing by 12.5% year-on-year to 54 896 units in November 2025. At the same time, vehicle buyers are increasingly initiating their purchase journeys online, using digital platforms to research models, compare prices, request quotations and evaluate dealership offerings (Maurer, Kramer & Quidwai, 2023; Terason, Pattanayanon & Phawitpiriyakliti 2025; Walker & Proff 2024). These developments have reconfigured customer expectations, with digital transparency, interface usability and seamless channel integration now shaping dealership evaluations, even before a physical visit occurs.
This growing dependence on digital touchpoints is not simply a behavioural shift but reflects broader structural changes in the automotive sector. Digitalisation is reshaping business models, enabling data-driven customer management, customer relationship management (CRM) integration and innovation in value delivery (Acciarini et al. 2022; Hu & Basiglio 2023; Dong & Verhoef 2024). The rise of artificial intelligence (AI), digital configurators, automated communications and Service 4.0 ecosystems has accelerated the transition towards hybrid service journeys in which customers fluidly move between online and physical dealership interactions (Dalili, Heidari & Ghasemi 2024; Huang & Rust 2023; Jankovic-Zugic et al. 2023). Therefore, understanding how customers evaluate satisfaction, trust and relational continuity in this environment carries substantial social and industry significance. Long-term dealership relationships remain central to customer safety, post-purchase servicing, maintenance quality and vehicle ownership experience. Consequently, identifying the relational drivers that sustain customer–dealership commitment within digitally enabled environments is vital for organisational performance and consumer well-being.
Although digital transformation has been widely examined in marketing research, the relational consequences of hybrid digital-physical journeys remain underexplored, particularly in high-involvement sectors such as automotive retail. Prior research provides strong evidence that satisfaction, trust and commitment jointly underpin relationship quality and loyalty in traditional, high-contact dealership settings (Van Tonder, Petzer & Van Zyl 2017; Van Vuuren, Roberts-Lombard & Van Tonder 2012). However, these mechanisms were conceptualised in an era when interpersonal salesperson interactions dominated customer evaluations. The growing prevalence of system-generated cues, such as interface reliability, automated communication accuracy and data transparency, raises important questions about whether these relational pathways operate unchanged in digitally mediated settings. Recent research on digital customer journeys and service ecosystems similarly highlights the need to reassess traditional relationship constructs in technology-enabled environments where customers evaluate firms across multiple integrated touchpoints (Becker & Jaakkola 2020; De Keyser et al. 2023; Dong & Verhoef 2024).
Scholars recently revisited commitment–trust theory, reaffirming the enduring explanatory power of trust and commitment in relational exchange while calling for renewed empirical testing within digitally transformed service environments (Keiningham et al. 2017; Palmatier, Dant & Grewal 2007; Steinhoff et al. 2019). Brown, Crosno and Tong (2019) questioned whether trust and commitment operate unchanged in digitally mediated exchanges, Morgan and Feng (2024) reaffirm customer trust theory (CTTs) foundational role within marketing capability research, and Badrinarayanan and Ramachandran (2024) called for renewed empirical testing of the theory across modern sales and service environments. However, despite this renewed conceptual attention and calls for updated empirical scrutiny, systematic testing of CTT within digitally enabled automotive retail contexts, particularly in emerging market settings, remains notably scarce.
Although recent scholarship has reaffirmed the relevance of commitment–trust theory and called for renewed empirical testing in digitally transformed service environments, empirical applications within hybrid automotive retail contexts, particularly in emerging markets, remain limited. In addition to this contextual gap, uncertainty persists regarding the role of perceived service innovation within relational frameworks. Some studies suggest innovation enhances relational outcomes by signalling competence and customer centricity (Mahmoud, Hinson & Anim 2018; Tai, Wang & Luo 2021), whereas others argue it primarily enhances functional value without altering deeper relational mechanisms (Pansari & Kumar 2017; Steinhoff et al. 2019). There is limited empirical clarity on whether innovation modifies the trust-commitment pathway in hybrid dealership ecosystems. Addressing this gap is essential to advance theory on customer–firm relationships in digital service environments.
Problem statement and conceptual framework
This study is grounded in CTT, the central framework within relationship marketing that conceptualises trust and commitment as the key mediators through which relationship-building efforts influence relational continuity (Morgan & Hunt 1994). Recent analyses reaffirm its relevance across contemporary service environments and call for renewed testing in digitally transformed contexts (Badrinarayanan & Ramachandran 2024; Morgan & Feng 2024). The theory suggests that satisfaction strengthens trust, which fosters commitment, relationships consistently validated in traditional service settings.
Digital transformation introduces system-based trust cues, such as interface reliability, data security and process transparency, that may complement or partially substitute interpersonal cues (Belanche, Casaló & Flavián 2021; Kim, Connerton & Park 2022). This raises theoretical uncertainty about whether digitalised service encounters weaken, strengthen or leave unchanged the classical satisfaction-trust-commitment mechanism. The role of perceived service innovation further complicates this relational structure. Innovation may enhance functional and experiential evaluations, yet its ability to condition relational pathways remains unclear. Consequently, the conceptual framework integrates satisfaction, trust and commitment within a CTT lens while examining perceived service innovation as a potential moderating variable.
Research objectives
This study aimed to examine whether the satisfaction-trust-commitment mechanism remains robust in digitally enabled automotive dealership environments and to assess whether perceived service innovation moderates the trust-commitment relationship. The research objectives included:
- To test the direct effect of satisfaction on trust.
- To test the direct effects of satisfaction and trust on commitment.
- To examine the mediating role of trust in the satisfaction-commitment relationship.
- To assess whether perceived service innovation moderates the trust-commitment relationship.
The literature review and hypotheses are discussed next, followed by the research design and methods. Thereafter, the measurement and structural model results are reported, with the findings, theoretical contributions, managerial implications and future research directions then being outlined. Finally, the study’s conclusion and limitations are acknowledged.
Literature review and hypothesis development
In digitally enabled automotive dealership environments, customers increasingly rely on psychological assessments of their service experiences to guide long-term relational decisions. Therefore, customer satisfaction (CS), trust and commitment remain core relational constructs for understanding how relationships are formed within hybrid human-digital service encounters. This section reviews the theoretical and empirical foundations of these constructs, emphasising the mediating role of customer trust in linking satisfaction to stronger relational commitment. It further examines perceived service innovation as a contextual moderator that may amplify or weaken trust’s influence on commitment, particularly as dealerships adopt more technology-driven service practices. By synthesising this body of work, this section provides the conceptual grounding for the study’s hypotheses and the development of the proposed model.
Commitment-trust theory, digital transformation and relationship quality
Commitment-trust theory remains one of the most influential frameworks for explaining why customers maintain long-term relationships with firms (Brown et al. 2019; Morgan & Hunt 1994). Commitment-trust theory proposes that satisfaction strengthens trust, which strengthens commitment, forming a sequential mechanism that underpins relationship quality and relational continuity. Recent scholarship confirms the enduring relevance of this framework in contemporary sales and service environments (Badrinarayanan & Ramachandran 2024; Morgan & Feng 2024) while also calling for renewed scrutiny of its assumptions as digital transformation reshapes customer-firm interaction patterns (Brown et al. 2019).
Digital transformation fundamentally reconfigures the informational, transactional and relational architecture of service encounters (Verhoef et al. 2021). In automotive retail specifically, industry reports indicate that customers now complete a substantial portion of their decision journey online before visiting a dealership, using digital channels to research models, compare prices, configure vehicles and obtain quotations (Terason et al. 2025; Walker & Proff 2024). This shifts the locus of satisfaction formation from purely interpersonal encounters to hybrid journeys in which system-based cues, such as website functionality, information accuracy and booking reliability, play a central role. Empirical work across banking, retail and hospitality similarly shows that digital interfaces shape satisfaction and relational outcomes via perceived transparency, convenience and control (Belanche, Casaló & Flavián 2019; Belanche et al. 2021; Steinhoff et al. 2019).
These developments suggest that classical relationship quality constructs, such as satisfaction, trust and commitment, originally conceptualised in high-contact, salesperson-dominated settings (Brown et al. 2019; Mpinganjira, Roberts-Lombard & Svensson 2017), must be re-examined in technologically mediated contexts. Recent research on digital customer journeys and omnichannel service environments similarly emphasises that relational constructs developed in traditional service settings require re-evaluation as customers increasingly interact with firms through hybrid digital–physical touchpoints (Becker & Jaakkola 2020; De Keyser et al. 2023; Dong & Verhoef 2024). In digitally enabled dealerships, customers integrate interpersonal and system-based cues when forming trust judgements (Chauhan, Akhtar & Gupta 2022; Dong & Verhoef 2024). The system-based trust theory proposes that when customers cannot directly observe a firm’s motives or internal processes, they rely on structural assurances, including secure systems, reliable procedures and situational normality such as professional interfaces and standardised processes, to infer trustworthiness (McKnight, Choudhury & Kacmar 2002). Contemporary studies on digital trust similarly show that customers rely on technological infrastructure, platform transparency and system reliability as signals of institutional trustworthiness in technology-enabled service environments (Becker & Jaakkola 2020; Huang & Rust 2023). Digital platforms provide structural assurances through secure payment gateways, traceable communications and transparent information displays, suggesting that CTT’s mechanisms might operate through a broader set of cues in hybrid journeys than originally envisaged. Against this backdrop, this study applied CTT as the primary theoretical lens to examine how satisfaction and trust shape commitment in digitally enabled automotive dealership environments and to test whether these mechanisms remain robust under conditions of technological mediation.
Service innovation, ecosystems and digitalised service experiences
Service innovation has become central to the digital transformation efforts of firms, particularly in environments where customers interact across multiple technology-enabled touchpoints. It refers to new or enhanced service processes, interfaces, and offerings that improve the service experience, often within broader digitally connected ecosystems (Lusch & Nambisan 2015; Wagner, Schramm-Klein & Steinmann 2020; Witell et al. 2016). In automotive retail, such innovations include online configurators, virtual showrooms, integrated booking platforms, automated service reminders and AI-based communication tools (Miguel et al. 2022; Wan et al. 2023).
However, empirical findings about the relational implications of service innovation remain fragmented. Some studies indicate that innovation can signal competence, responsiveness and modernity, thereby enhancing CS and loyalty intentions (Mahmoud et al. 2018; Tai et al. 2021). Others suggest that innovation primarily improves functional outcomes, such as convenience and process efficiency, without fundamentally altering deeper relational constructs such as trust and commitment (Pansari & Kumar 2017; Steinhoff et al. 2019). Very few studies explicitly examine whether service innovation interacts with established relationship quality mechanisms or influences the satisfaction-trust-commitment pathway central to CTT.
To clarify these theoretical ambiguities and locate this study within broader service innovation literature, a structured synthesis of key contributions across A- and strong B-rated journals was undertaken. Table 1 summarises leading conceptual and empirical work on service innovation, service ecosystems and relationship quality.
| TABLE 1: Summary of conceptual and empirical work contributions on service innovation, service ecosystems and relationship quality. |
Synthesis and conceptual gap
Collectively, the studies summarised in Table 1 reveal that service innovation research, even within reputable A- and strong B-rated outlets, remains theoretically fragmented and insufficiently linked to the relational quality mechanisms that underpin long-term customer-firm relationships. Many studies demonstrate that service innovation enhances satisfaction, value or loyalty within various industries, such as banking, hospitality, telecommunications and automated retail. However, few incorporate trust or commitment as distinct constructs and even fewer examine how innovation interacts with the satisfaction-trust-commitment sequence foundational to relationship marketing and CTT.
Moreover, the reviewed work rarely examines high-involvement hybrid digital–physical contexts. Automotive dealerships represent such environments, where customers face substantial financial, performance and safety risks and where relationships typically extend beyond the initial transaction to include ongoing maintenance and after-sales service. None of the studies specifically investigates service innovation within digitally enabled automotive dealerships, nor assesses whether innovation conditions the trust-commitment pathway predicted by CTT. This omission highlights a clear conceptual and empirical gap. This study addressed this gap by re-examining the satisfaction-trust-commitment mechanism in digitally transformed dealership ecosystems and evaluated perceived service innovation as a potential moderator of the trust-commitment relationship. Building on this foundation, the following subsections develop hypotheses for the tested model.
Digitalisation and the transformation of relational value
Digitalisation has blurred the boundary between transactional efficiency and relational quality in service settings (Becker & Jaakkola 2020; Kamalaldin et al. 2020). Historically, automotive dealership relationships were shaped primarily by salesperson expertise, interpersonal warmth and the quality of after-sales engagement (Balinado et al. 2021; Van Tonder et al. 2017). These interpersonal drivers remain important, yet digital touchpoints now play an equally critical role by providing rapid access to information, self-service convenience and greater transparency around pricing and availability (De Keyser et al. 2023; Grewal, Roggeveen & Nordfält 2017; Verhoef et al. 2021). Recent research on digitally integrated service ecosystems further suggests that technology-enabled interfaces increasingly complement interpersonal interactions by enhancing accessibility, information transparency and service responsiveness (Becker & Jaakkola 2020; Hollebeek, Sprott & Andreassen 2022).
Therefore, in digitally enabled dealerships, CS and trust emerge from evaluations of an integrated journey rather than a single encounter. Website performance, information accuracy, online booking reliability, real-time communication, showroom experience and service quality all contribute to relational judgements. Contemporary customer journey research similarly emphasises that value creation occurs across interconnected digital and physical touchpoints that collectively shape customer perceptions of reliability, convenience and relational quality (Becker & Jaakkola 2020; De Keyser et al. 2023). This hybrid reality suggests that CTT’s relational constructs are not replaced by digitalisation but are recontextualised within multichannel service ecosystems. Whether the psychological linkages identified by CTT function in the same way within these digital–physical journeys remains an open empirical question.
Customer satisfaction and trust in hybrid service environments
Customer satisfaction reflects a cumulative evaluation of a dealership’s performance relative to expectations across multiple touchpoints, including perceptions of process quality, information quality and interpersonal interactions (Oliver 1980). In hybrid digital-physical contexts, satisfaction is influenced not only by face-to-face encounters but also by the ease of navigating online interfaces, the coherence of cross-channel experiences and the reliability of digital tools (Pansari & Kumar 2017; Van Phuong et al. 2024).
Consequently, in digitally enabled dealerships, satisfaction emerges from evaluations that span website functionality, information completeness, quotation processes, booking systems, in-dealership treatment and after-sales service. Each touchpoint generates cues about organisational competence and customer centricity. The system-based trust theory posits that when customers cannot directly observe the intentions of a firm, they rely on structural assurances, for example, secure systems, professional interfaces and standardised procedures and situational normality to infer trustworthiness (Al-Kfairy et al. 2023; Geebren 2025; McKnight et al. 2002). Digital channels provide such structural assurances through secure communication, traceable interactions and transparent information displays. Accordingly, high satisfaction with hybrid service journeys should strengthen perceptions of reliability and integrity, thereby fostering trust. Empirical work on digital banking, hospitality and retail supports this satisfaction-trust link in technology-mediated environments (Belanche et al. 2019, 2021; Steinhoff et al. 2019). Based on this reasoning, the following hypothesis is proposed:
H1: Customer satisfaction positively affects customer trust in digitally enabled automotive dealerships.
Customer trust and commitment in digitally enabled dealerships
Trust is the willingness to rely on a partner based on perceptions of reliability, integrity and dependability (Badrinarayanan & Ramachandran 2024; Morgan & Hunt 1994). In automotive retail, trust is particularly salient due to the high financial outlay, performance uncertainty and safety implications associated with vehicle purchase and maintenance (Brown et al. 2019; Van Tonder, Fullerton & De Beer 2020). For example, South African consumers face substantial financial exposure, as vehicle purchases often involve high capital outlays, long-term financing arrangements and ongoing servicing commitments, reflecting the scale of the domestic automotive market, which recorded nearly 600 000 new vehicle sales in 2025 (NAAMSA 2026). Trust helps customers manage perceived risk in this setting by providing confidence that a dealership will act in their best interest, deliver promised quality and provide reliable after-sales support over time.
CTT posits that trust is a central determinant of relational continuity, as customers are more likely to commit to relationships where they believe the partner is reliable and benevolent (Morgan & Hunt 1994). In digitally transforming dealership contexts, digital tools do not eliminate risk. Still, customers may reduce information asymmetry through transparent pricing, online reviews and comparison tools, potentially strengthening the role of trust in commitment formation. Empirical studies across digital banking, social commerce and omnichannel environments show that trust remains a strong predictor of commitment and relational intention, even when interactions are partially mediated by technology (Alzaidi & Agag 2022; Ozuem et al. 2024; Reydet & Carsana 2017). This suggests that system-based trust and interpersonal trust can coexist to support long-term relational commitment in hybrid journeys. Accordingly, the following hypothesis is proposed:
H2: Customer trust positively affects customer commitment in digitally enabled automotive dealerships.
Customer satisfaction and commitment in digital service contexts
Satisfaction is frequently positioned as a primary determinant of behavioural intentions, including repurchase, recommendation and long-term commitment, because it signals that the relationship has generated value and is likely to do so in the future (Oliver 1980; Otto, Szymanski & Varadarajan 2020). Meta-analytic evidence indicates that satisfaction exerts a positive, though variably strong, effect on loyalty-related outcomes across industries (Otto et al. 2020). In hybrid service contexts, favourable evaluations of digital and physical touchpoints can enhance customers’ willingness to maintain relationships, as consistent satisfaction indicates reliable value delivery and reduces the perceived risk of future interactions (Pansari & Kumar 2017).
At the same time, digitalisation introduces conditions that may both weaken and strengthen the satisfaction-commitment link. On one hand, reduced switching costs and the availability of competing platforms may make customers less dependent on any single provider, potentially weakening the impact of satisfaction on commitment (Jacob, Thomas & Joseph 2024). On the other hand, when digital tools deliver high convenience, integrated experiences and time savings, customers may become more inclined to commit to providers that consistently meet their expectations, particularly in high-involvement purchases where learning and adaptation costs are non-trivial (Sumiyana & Komariyah 2024). Hence, in automotive retail, satisfaction with the integrated sales and service experience may contribute directly to customers’ willingness to maintain long-term relationships with specific dealerships. Thus, the following hypothesis is advanced:
H3: Customer satisfaction positively affects customer commitment in digitally enabled automotive dealerships.
The mediating role of trust
CTT proposes that trust functions as a key mediating mechanism through which satisfaction influences long-term relational intention (Jacob et al. 2023; Morgan & Hunt 1994). Satisfied customers are more likely to perceive a firm as reliable and benevolent, which increases their willingness to commit to the relationship. In traditional dealership contexts, satisfaction has consistently been shown to increase trust, thus strengthening commitment (Mpinganjira et al. 2017; Van Vuuren et al. 2012).
Digitalisation may complicate this pathway by introducing alternative evaluative structures and potentially reducing interpersonal engagement. Nonetheless, system-based trust research indicates that digital performance cues, such as platform reliability, information accuracy and data security, can reinforce perceptions of confidence and credibility, allowing trust to operate as a mediator even when interactions are technology reliant (Belanche et al. 2021; Dai & Liu 2024). In hybrid digital-physical dealership ecosystems, satisfaction with both digital and interpersonal aspects of the journey is expected to shape commitment partly by strengthening trust.
Partial rather than full mediation is anticipated. While trust is expected to translate satisfaction into deeper relational intention, satisfaction may also exert a direct effect on commitment through habitual inertia, perceived switching costs and the convenience benefits of remaining with a familiar dealership (Otto et al. 2020). Hence, satisfaction may influence commitment directly and indirectly via trust. Hence, the following hypothesis is proposed:
H4: Customer trust mediates the relationship between customer satisfaction and customer commitment in digitally enabled automotive dealerships.
Perceived service innovation as a moderator
Perceived service innovation reflects customers’ perceptions of the extent to which a dealership employs novel and technologically advanced processes and tools, such as digital configurators, online booking systems, automated service communication and virtual information resources, to enhance the service experience (Wan et al. 2023; Wu et al. 2024).
Service innovation may interact with the trust–commitment relationship through two competing mechanisms. Firstly, innovation may amplify the positive effect of trust on commitment (Wu et al. 2024). When customers perceive a dealership as both trustworthy and technologically progressive, innovation can serve as a signal of organisational competence, future orientation and customer centricity. These signals may strengthen customers’ confidence in the dealership’s long-term reliability and adaptive capability, thereby increasing their intention to maintain the relationship. Under this complementary mechanism, trust provides relational assurance, while perceived innovation reinforces expectations of sustained value creation, jointly strengthening commitment.
Secondly, innovation could dampen the effect of trust on commitment by providing functional assurance independent of relational confidence (Wu et al. 2024). For instance, if customers perceive that digital systems ‘just work’, booking processes are reliable, information is transparent and service reminders are seamless, they may then feel comfortable committing based on functional performance alone, even if relational trust is weaker. In this scenario, perceived service innovation partially substitutes trust as a basis for commitment, thus weakening the reliance on relational mechanisms. Given these competing possibilities, the direction of moderation is treated as an empirical question. To capture both potential patterns, the following alternative hypotheses are specified:
H5a: Perceived service innovation positively moderates the relationship between customer trust and customer commitment, such that the effect of trust on commitment is stronger when perceived service innovation is high.
H5b: Perceived service innovation negatively moderates the relationship between customer trust and customer commitment, such that the effect of trust on commitment is weaker when perceived service innovation is high, indicating functional substitution.
Perceived service innovation is conceptualised solely as a moderator, rather than as a direct antecedent for three reasons. Firstly, innovation in automotive retail primarily concerns process enhancements (e.g. booking systems and configurators), rather than changes to the core service outcome, suggesting that its primary role is contextual instead of relational. Secondly, prior literature and preliminary empirical evidence indicate that perceived innovation correlates with relational constructs but does not exhibit clear theoretical priority as an antecedent of commitment relative to satisfaction and trust. Thirdly, modelling innovation as a moderator allowed this study to address a theoretically distinct question – whether technological perceptions reshape relational processes, rather than whether innovation independently builds commitment. Figure 1 depicts the proposed research model.
 |
FIGURE 1: The proposed research model and hypothesis. |
|
Research methods and design
To empirically test the proposed hypotheses and conceptual model, a structured quantitative research design was employed.
Research design and data collection
This study adopted a quantitative, cross-sectional survey design to examine the relationships among CS, trust and commitment within digitally enabled automotive dealership environments. A structured online questionnaire was used to capture standardised responses from South African automotive customers.
Data were collected via a professional research agency that distributed the survey link to members of a verified national consumer panel. Before responding to the questionnaire, respondents were screened to ensure they had engaged with an automotive dealership (online or in person) within the previous 12 months. The questionnaire comprised four sections: (1) screening and consent, (2) dealership interaction behaviour, (3) demographic profile and (4) psychometric scales measuring CS, trust, commitment and perceived service innovation (see Table 2).
| TABLE 2: Construct descriptions, sample items, sources and scale anchors. |
A pilot test with 30 respondents was conducted to assess clarity, sequencing and relevance of the items. Feedback from the pilot informed minor wording refinements, ensuring a clear and user-friendly instrument for the main data collection.
Sample and procedure
A total of 500 responses were initially obtained. After removing incomplete questionnaires and multivariate outliers identified using Mahalanobis distance (p < 0.001), 463 valid responses were retained for analysis. Respondents were South African customers aged 16 years and older who had interacted with a franchised new-vehicle dealership in Gauteng, Western Cape and KwaZulu-Natal (see Table 3).
| TABLE 3: Socio-demographic profile of respondents (N = 463). |
A non-probability quota sampling strategy was employed to ensure representation across three generational groups relevant to automotive segmentation: (1) changers (< 30 years old), (2) boomers (30–49 years old) and traditionalists (≥ 50 years old). Quotas were also applied across the three provinces. Participation was voluntary and respondents completed the online questionnaire at their own convenience. The survey took approximately 10 min to complete.
Construct measurement
All constructs were measured using multi-item Likert scales adapted from established relationship marketing and service innovation literature. Customer satisfaction, trust and commitment were measured on seven-point scales (1 = strongly disagree; 7 = strongly agree). Perceived service innovation – conceptualised as customers’ perception of a dealership’s technology-enabled service practices was also measured using seven-point Likert-type items.
Content validity was ensured through expert review by academics familiar with automotive services and by the pilot test. As covariance-based structural equation modelling (CB-SEM) requires unidimensional and psychometrically sound indicators, scale purification was undertaken during confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Only items with satisfactory factor loadings, conceptual coherence and reliability were retained in the final measurement model. These retained items and their properties are summarised in Table 4.
| TABLE 4: Measurement model results (N = 463). |
Data analysis and validity checks
Data analysis was conducted using AMOS 28 and SPSS. The two-step CB-SEM procedure was followed:
- Measurement model: CFA was used to assess indicator reliability, internal consistency, convergent validity and discriminant validity (see Table 5).
- Structural model: The hypothesised relationships among satisfaction, trust and commitment were estimated using maximum likelihood.
| TABLE 5: Discriminant validity based on Fornell Larcker criterion (N = 463). |
Normality was evaluated using skewness and kurtosis. To assess potential common method bias, Harman’s single-factor test was performed, and a one-factor CFA model was compared to the full measurement model. The largest single factor accounted for less than 50% of the variance, and the one-factor model showed substantially poorer fit, indicating that common method bias was unlikely to be a serious concern.
Global model fit was evaluated using χ2/df, goodness-of-fit index (GFI), adjusted goodness-of-fit index (AGFI), comparative fit index (CFI), Tucker-Lewis index (TLI), root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) and standardised root mean square residual (SRMR). Recommended thresholds were used as benchmarks for adequate fit. The indices for the measurement and structural models are reported in Table 6.
| TABLE 6: Measurement and structural model fit indices (N = 463). |
Moderation analysis
Perceived service innovation was modelled as a moderator of the relationship between trust and commitment. A latent interaction term (trust × innovation) was specified in Analysis of Moment Structures (AMOS) using product indicators. The significance of the interaction term was assessed using bias-corrected bootstrapping with 5000 resamples. Simple slopes were examined at ±1 standard deviation of perceived service innovation to aid the interpretation of any significant moderation effects.
Ethical considerations
Ethical clearance for the study was obtained from the University of Johannesburg’s School of Consumer Intelligence and Information Systems Research Ethics Committee (Ethics Reference Number: 2024SCiiS023). Participation was voluntary, and informed digital consent was obtained from all respondents. No identifying information was collected, and all data were handled in accordance with the Protection of Personal Information Act.
Results
This section presents the empirical findings of the study, beginning with descriptive statistics and correlation analysis, followed by hypothesis testing to evaluate the proposed relationships among the constructs.
Descriptive statistics
Descriptive statistics and inter-construct correlations are presented in Table 7. Mean scores for satisfaction, trust and commitment were all high, indicating generally favourable evaluations of dealership relationships. Correlations between the constructs are positive and significant, thus consistent with the theorised relational mechanisms.
| TABLE 7: Descriptive statistics and inter-construct correlations (N = 463). |
Measurement model evaluation
Confirmatory factor analysis was used to evaluate the measurement properties of the latent constructs. All standardised factor loadings were statistically significant at p < 0.001 and exceeded 0.57, with most above 0.70, indicating satisfactory indicator reliability. Cronbach’s alpha and CR values for all constructs were greater than 0.70, demonstrating internal consistency. Average variance extracted (AVE) exceeded 0.50 for each construct, supporting convergent validity. These results were reported in Table 4.
Discriminant validity was assessed using the Fornell-Larcker criterion. For each construct, the square root of its AVE exceeded its correlations with other constructs, confirming discriminant validity (Table 5). Together, these findings indicate that the measurement model demonstrates sound psychometric properties. The measurement model exhibited good fit: χ2 = 431.664, df = 144, χ2/df = 2.998, GFI = 0.914, AGFI = 0.886, CFI = 0.981, TLI = 0.977, RMSEA = 0.066 and SRMR = 0.028. All indices met recommended thresholds, providing a robust foundation for structural model testing.
Structural model assessment
Following validation of the measurement model, the structural model was estimated to test the hypothesised relationships among satisfaction, trust and commitment and to incorporate the interaction term for perceived service innovation. The structural model demonstrated acceptable fit (χ2 = 233.088, df = 84, χ2/df = 2.775, GFI = 0.921, AGFI = 0.887, CFI = 0.944, TLI = 0.930, RMSEA = 0.072, SRMR = 0.044). Figure 2 presents the structural model with standardised path coefficients, and Table 8 summarises the direct path estimates.
 |
FIGURE 2: Structural equation model results for customer satisfaction, trust and commitment (N = 463). |
|
| TABLE 8: Structural path estimates and hypothesis testing results (N = 463). |
All direct hypothesised relationships were significant and positive in Table 9. Satisfaction had a strong effect on trust (β = 0.655, p < 0.001) and a significant direct effect on commitment (β = 0.415, p < 0.001), while trust also significantly influenced commitment (β = 0.356, p = 0.004).
| TABLE 9: Structural model estimates with R2, f2 and Q2 (N = 463). |
Mediation analysis
To examine the mediating role of trust in the relationship between satisfaction and commitment, a bias-corrected bootstrapping procedure with 5000 resamples was conducted. The results are illustrated in Figure 3.
As shown in Figure 3, satisfaction has a significant positive direct effect on commitment. In addition, satisfaction exerts a significant indirect effect on commitment through trust (β = 0.050, p = 0.047). Because both the direct and indirect effects remain significant, the results indicate partial mediation.
This finding suggests that CS enhances commitment in two ways: directly and indirectly by increasing trust, which in turn strengthens commitment. Trust, therefore, operates as a relational mechanism that partially translates evaluative satisfaction into deeper dealership commitment within digitally enabled dealership relationships.
The indirect effect is statistically significant but smaller in magnitude than the direct effect, indicating that while trust plays an important explanatory role, satisfaction remains the primary driver of commitment. This supports H4.
Moderation analysis
Perceived service innovation was specified as a moderator of the trust-commitment relationship. The latent interaction term (trust × innovation) was non-significant (β = −0.009, p = 0.962), indicating that perceived innovation did not significantly strengthen or weaken the effect of trust on commitment within the tested model.
Although perceived service innovation correlated positively with satisfaction, trust and commitment at the bivariate level, its role was not conditional in the structural model. The relational pathway from satisfaction to trust and from trust to commitment appears to operate largely independently of customers’ perception of service innovation in this context.
Diagnostic checks
Additional diagnostic checks confirmed the robustness of the proposed model. Variance inflation factor values for all indicators and predictors are below 2.0, indicating no multicollinearity concerns. The common method bias tests (Harman’s single-factor test and comparison of a one-factor CFA model with the full model) suggest that the data are not dominated by a single latent factor and that common method variance is unlikely to substantively bias the results.
Discussion
This study examined how satisfaction, trust and commitment interact within digitally enabled automotive dealership environments and whether perceived service innovation conditions these relationships. The findings indicate that although digitalisation changes how customers evaluate their service journeys, it does not alter the relational logic underpinning commitment. Satisfaction and trust remain central drivers of relationship quality, whereas perceived innovation enhances functional value but does not modify relational mechanisms. Recent research on digital customer journeys similarly suggests that technological integration reshapes service delivery processes without fundamentally replacing the psychological foundations of customer–firm relationships (Becker & Jaakkola 2020; De Keyser et al. 2023; Verhoef et al. 2021). In high-involvement service environments such as automotive retail, customers continue to rely on satisfaction and trust as key signals of reliability, risk reduction and relational security when interacting with firms across digital and physical touchpoints (Becker & Jaakkola 2020; Hollebeek et al. 2022).
Direct effects and comparison to prior South African research
The strong satisfaction–trust effect aligns with earlier South African research, notably Van Tonder et al. (2017), who reported similar relationships in an offline luxury dealership context. Despite significant contextual differences, including the integration of digital touchpoints, broader brand portfolios and more diverse customer demographics, the relational pattern remains consistent. This suggests that satisfaction serves as a robust anchor of relational confidence across both traditional and hybrid automotive environments. Recent empirical studies across digitally mediated service industries similarly confirm that satisfaction continues to function as a primary antecedent of trust and long-term relational outcomes even as service encounters become increasingly technology-enabled (Hollebeek et al. 2022; Rather, Hollebeek & Rasoolimanesh 2022).
The findings of this study extend prior work by conceptualising trust as a mediator rather than a parallel antecedent. While Van Tonder et al. (2017) found that satisfaction directly influenced trust and behavioural intention, the current results revealed a dual-path mechanism: satisfaction affects commitment both indirectly through trust (relational pathway) and directly through the perceived coherence of hybrid digital-physical interactions (experiential pathway). This refinement aligns with recent omnichannel research indicating that customers increasingly evaluate service encounters holistically across integrated physical and digital channels, where seamless experiences reinforce relational engagement and commitment (Becker & Jaakkola 2020; De Keyser et al. 2023).
A further distinction concerns the trust–outcome pathway. Van Tonder et al. (2017) reported no direct effect of trust on behavioural intention in a luxury setting, whereas this study found that trust significantly predicts commitment in mainstream and digitally mediated dealerships. This divergence suggests that when customers rely more heavily on digital tools and experience greater transparency across multiple touchpoints, trust may play an even stronger role in shaping relational intention. Recent relationship marketing research similarly demonstrates that trust remains a critical mechanism through which customers develop loyalty, relational commitment and long-term engagement with firms operating in digitally integrated service ecosystems (Hollebeek et al. 2022; Rather et al. 2022).
Mediation: Trust as a dual-pathway mechanism
Trust partially mediates the satisfaction–commitment relationship, indicating that customers rely on both relational reassurance and holistic journey coherence when forming long-term relational intentions. The relatively stronger direct effect of satisfaction implies that hybrid experiences characterised by transparency, reliability and reduced friction can foster commitment independently of trust. This finding extends the commitment–trust theory by demonstrating that in technology-rich environments, experiential ease complements relational confidence rather than being subordinate to it. Recent research on customer engagement and digitally enabled service ecosystems similarly highlights how satisfaction, trust and engagement mechanisms interact to drive sustained customer relationships in omnichannel environments (Hollebeek et al. 2022; Rather et al. 2022).
Moderation: Innovation as a contextual rather than relational mechanism
Perceived service innovation does not moderate the trust–commitment pathway. This null effect contrasts with the literature suggesting that innovation enhances relational outcomes and therefore highlights a meaningful boundary condition. Three explanations are plausible. Firstly, customers may process functional (innovation) and relational (trust) cues through distinct cognitive systems, resulting in parallel rather than interactive effects. Secondly, trust may already operate near ceiling levels in the high-risk automotive context, leaving limited variance for innovation to amplify relational outcomes. Thirdly, innovation may function as a hygiene factor – expected by customers and appreciated when present, but insufficient to alter deeper relational mechanisms. Recent service innovation research similarly suggests that technological advancements primarily enhance service efficiency, personalisation and convenience, while relational outcomes such as commitment continue to depend on trust and consistent service quality (Becker & Jaakkola 2020; De Keyser et al. 2023; Ostrom et al. 2021).
Theoretical implications
This study contributes to relationship marketing theory in four key ways. Firstly, the results confirm the durability of CTT within hybrid digital-physical environments. Satisfaction and trust remain strong predictors of commitment, demonstrating that digitalisation complements, rather than replaces, relational mechanisms. Secondly, the identification of dual satisfaction-commitment pathways refines existing theory by showing that experiential coherence functions as an additional mechanism influencing commitment. This provides conceptual nuance to models that traditionally emphasise interpersonal interaction as the locus of relational development.
Thirdly, the non-significant moderating effect of perceived service innovation establishes an empirical boundary condition for digital transformation research. Innovation enhances functional performance but does not reshape relational dynamics in high-involvement settings. This distinction clarifies theoretical ambiguities by differentiating functional value from relational value, thereby highlighting the need for models that account for the independent – and sometimes non-overlapping – roles of technological and relational evaluations.
Fourthly, the findings contribute to emerging work on digital trust by demonstrating that customers incorporate interpersonal and system-based cues when forming trust. However, system trust does not interact with relational trust to strengthen commitment, suggesting a layered but non-interactive trust architecture. This insight emphasises the need for relationship quality models to integrate digital trust without overstating its relational influence. By contrasting the present findings with Van Tonder et al. (2017), this study expanded the applicability of relationship-quality theory in South Africa, demonstrating that relational processes in mainstream and digitally enabled dealerships are structured differently from those in offline luxury environments.
Managerial implications
Dealership managers ought to recognise that relationship quality emerges from relational competence and the integrated performance of digital and physical touchpoints. Satisfaction influences commitment through relational and experiential pathways, requiring cross-channel quality assurance systems that ensure accurate information, pricing consistency and friction-free navigation across platforms. Trust remains central, despite digitalisation. Thus, dealerships should institutionalise organisation-wide trust-building mechanisms, transparent pricing, predictable processes, effective complaint management and consistent follow-through. Trust should be understood as a strategic organisational capability, rather than a frontline behaviour. The relational neutrality of innovation indicates that digital investments should be framed as enablers, not substitutes, for relational quality. Advanced tools cannot compensate for inconsistent service or operational unreliability. Therefore, employee training should focus on hybrid journey competence, including the ability to interpret digital traces, personalise interactions and ensure channel continuity.
Three pitfalls are particularly likely to undermine relationship quality:
- Over-investing in digital features while neglecting relational fundamentals: innovation improves convenience but cannot substitute reliability, fairness or integrity.
- Assuming digitally fluent customers require less trust building: despite the extensive use of technology, customers across age groups rely heavily on trust when forming commitment.
- Treating digital and physical operations as separate spheres: siloed processes create inconsistencies that erode satisfaction. Hybrid journeys require cross-functional integration.
By addressing these pitfalls proactively, dealerships can translate technological upgrades into sustained relational value.
Limitations and future research
Several limitations provide avenues for further research. The cross-sectional design restricts causal inference, thus longitudinal or experimental studies could clarify how satisfaction, trust and innovation perceptions evolve across repeated encounters. The reliance on self-reported measures introduces potential method bias. Hence, future studies could link perceptual data to behavioural indicators, such as service retention or CRM records.
Perceived innovation was conceptualised as a unidimensional construct, which may mask the differential impact of informational, transactional, communicative and experiential innovations. Disaggregated measures could yield more nuanced insights. Furthermore, while trust’s mediating role was confirmed, the specific psychological mechanisms through which satisfaction generates trust in digital contexts remain unexplored. Qualitative methods may illuminate these micro-level processes. Finally, future models should integrate value-based or identity-based constructs, such as perceived value or brand attachment, to assess whether relational pathways differ across mainstream and luxury segments or across generational cohorts.
Conclusion
This study demonstrated that while digitalisation reshapes the nature of customer–dealership interactions, the core relational mechanisms underpinning commitment remain grounded in satisfaction and trust. Satisfaction influences commitment through both relational and experiential pathways, whereas perceived innovation enhances functional value without altering the underlying relational processes. These findings contribute to the literature by showing that the relational mechanisms proposed by the Commitment–Trust Theory remain robust even within digitally enabled automotive service environments. Rather than replacing interpersonal relationship drivers, digital technologies appear to extend the range of cues through which customers evaluate reliability, transparency and service competence.
From a managerial perspective, the results suggest that dealerships should prioritise the seamless integration of digital and interpersonal touchpoints to strengthen relationship quality. Investments in digital platforms and service innovation should therefore be complemented by consistent service delivery, trustworthy practices and transparent communication across the entire customer journey. Technological novelty alone is unlikely to generate sustained commitment unless it is embedded within coherent hybrid experiences that reinforce customer confidence and reduce perceived risk.
Future research should expand on these insights through longitudinal research designs that capture evolving customer relationships over time. The integration of behavioural data, such as actual service usage and repurchase patterns, may further enhance understanding of commitment formation in digitally mediated dealership environments. In addition, future studies could examine differentiated forms of service innovation, including AI-enabled interactions, digital advisory tools and predictive service technologies, to better understand how emerging technologies shape relationship quality in evolving automotive ecosystems.
Acknowledgements
This article is partially based on the author’s doctoral study. Details are as follows: Field, J., “A customer engagement model for the South African automotive dealerships: A service innovation perspective”, PhD in Marketing Management, Faculty of Management, University of Johannesburg, supervised by Prof. I Struweg and Prof I. Ward (nee Lubbe), submitted in 2025. The authors would like to express their sincere appreciation to all participants who took part in this study and shared their experiences and perceptions. We further acknowledge Osmoz for their professional support in administering the online survey and facilitating data collection. The authors also thank academic colleagues within the Department of Marketing Management at the University of Johannesburg for their constructive feedback and methodological advice during the development of the study. These contributions, while not qualifying for authorship, were instrumental in strengthening the quality of the research.
Competing interests
The authors reported that they received funding from the Wholesale and Retail Sector Education and Training Authority (W&R SETA), South Africa, which may be affected by the research reported in the enclosed publication. The authors have disclosed those interests fully and have implemented an approved plan for managing any potential conflicts arising from their involvement. The terms of these funding arrangements have been reviewed and approved by the affiliated university in accordance with its policy on objectivity in research.
CRediT authorship contribution
Jade Field: Conceptualisation, Data curation, Formal analysis, Methodology, Project administration, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. Ilse Struweg: Conceptualisation, Supervision. Isolde Ward: Conceptualisation, Supervision. All authors reviewed the article, contributed to the discussion of results, approved the final version for submission and publication and take responsibility for the integrity of its findings.
Funding information
This research was supported by the Wholesale and Retail Sector Education and Training Authority (W&R SETA), South Africa. The funder had no role in the study design, data collection, data analysis, interpretation of results or the decision to submit the manuscript for publication.
Data availability
The datasets generated and analysed during the current study are not publicly available because of ethical restrictions and the protection of participant confidentiality, in accordance with the ethical clearance conditions of the University of Johannesburg. De-identified data supporting the findings of this study may be made available from the corresponding author, Jade Field, upon reasonable request and subject to institutional approval.
Disclaimer
The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and are the product of professional research. It does not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any affiliated institution, funder, agency or that of the publisher. The authors are responsible for this article’s findings and content.
References
Acciarini, C., Borelli, F., Capo, F., Cappa, F. & Sarrocco, C., 2022, ‘Can Digitalization Favour The Emergence Of Innovative And Sustainable Business Models? A Qualitative Exploration In The Automotive Sector’, Journal Of Strategy And Management 15(3), 335–352. https://doi.org/10.1108/Jsma-02-2021-0033
Al-Kfairy, M., Alrawad, M., Al-Kurdi, B. & Alshurideh, M., 2023, ‘Understanding trust drivers of social commerce platforms’, Heliyon 9(9), e19625. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e19625
Alzaidi, M.S. & Agag, G., 2022, ‘The role of trust and privacy concerns in using social media for e-retail services: The moderating role of COVID-19’, Journal of Retailing & Consumer Services 68, 103042. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2022.103042
Awuku, E., Agyei, P.M. & Gonu, E., 2023, ‘Service innovation practices and customer loyalty in the telecommunication industry’, PLoS One 18(3), e0282588. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0282588
Badrinarayanan, V. & Ramachandran, I., 2024, ‘Relational exchanges in the sales domain: A review and research agenda through the lens of commitment-trust theory of relationship marketing’, Journal of Business Research 177, 114644. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2024.114644
Balinado, J.R., Prasetyo, Y.T., Young, M.N., Persada, S.F., Miraja, B.A. & Redi, A.A.N.P., 2021, ‘The effect of service quality on customer satisfaction in an automotive after-sales service’, Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity 7(2), 116. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc7020116
Becker, L. & Jaakkola, E., 2020, ‘Customer experience: Fundamental premises and implications for research’, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 48, 630–648. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-019-00718-x
Belanche, D., Casaló, L.V. & Flavián, C., 2019, ‘Artificial intelligence in fintech: Understanding robo-advisors adoption among customers’, Industrial Management & Data Systems 119(7), 1411–1430. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMDS-08-2018-0368
Belanche, D., Casaló, L.V. & Flavián, C., 2021, ‘Frontline robots in tourism and hospitality: Service enhancement or cost reduction?’, Electronic Markets 31, 477–492. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-020-00432-5
Biswas, A., Kant, R. & Jaiswal, A., 2025, ‘Looking beyond transactions: Decoding the role of service innovation, relationship commitment and fairness in driving customer satisfaction in retail banking’, Benchmarking: An International Journal 32(7), 2749–2775. https://doi.org/10.1108/BIJ-07-2022-0435
Boxer, I. & Rekettye, G., 2011, ‘The relation between perceived service innovation, service value, emotional intelligence, customer commitment and loyalty in B2B’, International Journal of Services and Operations Management 8(2), 222–256. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJSOM.2011.038573
Brown, J.R., Crosno, J.L. & Tong, P.Y., 2019, ‘Is the theory of trust and commitment in marketing relationships incomplete?’, Industrial Marketing Management 77, 155–169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2018.10.005
Chauhan, S., Akhtar, A. & Gupta, A., 2022, ‘Customer experience in digital banking: A review and future research directions’, International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences 14(2), 311–348. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijqss-02-2021-0027
Dai, X. & Liu, Q., 2024, ‘Impact of artificial intelligence on consumer buying behaviors: Study about the online retail purchase’, Journal of Infrastructure, Policy and Development 8(9), 7700. https://doi.org/10.24294/jipd.v8i9.7700
Dalili, A., Heidari, S.A. & Ghasemi, B., 2024, ‘Evaluating the role of digital marketing on the development of dynamic capabilities in the automotive industry’, Journal of Technology in Entrepreneurship and Strategic Management 3(1), 139–151. https://doi.org/10.61838/kman.jtesm.3.1.9
De Keyser, A., Verleye, K., Lemon, K.N., Keiningham, T.L. & Klaus, P., 2023, ‘Moving the customer experience field forward: Introducing the touchpoints, context, qualities (TCQ) framework’, Journal of Service Research 26(3), 433–455. https://doi.org/10.1177/10946705221119893
Den Hertog, P., 2000, ‘Knowledge-intensive business services as co-producers of innovation’, International Journal of Innovation Management 4(4), 491–528. https://doi.org/10.1142/S136391960000024X
Dong, J.Q. & Verhoef, P.C. (eds.), 2024, ‘Introduction to a research agenda for digital transformation’, in A research agenda for digital transformation, pp. 1–8, Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781035306435.00005
Fornell, C., Johnson, M.D., Anderson, E.W., Cha, J. & Bryant, B.E., 1996, ‘The American Customer Satisfaction Index: Nature, purpose, and findings’, Journal of Marketing 60(4), 7–18. https://doi.org/10.2307/1251898
Ganesan, P. & Sridhar, M., 2016, ‘Service innovation and customer performance of telecommunication service provider: A study on mediation effect of corporate reputation’, Corporate Reputation Review 19(1), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1057/crr.2015.29
Geebren, A., 2025, ‘Antecedents of trust in mobile banking: Do they differ across generations?’, Information Security Journal: A Global Perspective 34(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/10580530.2025.2506365
Grewal, D., Roggeveen, A.L. & Nordfält, J., 2017, ‘The future of retailing’, Journal of Retailing 93(1), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretai.2016.12.008
Hollebeek, L.D., Sprott, D.E. & Andreassen, T.W., 2022, ‘Customer engagement: Theory, research, and managerial implications’, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 50(3), 395–408.
Hu, L. & Basiglio, A., 2023, ‘A multiple-case study on the adoption of customer relationship management and big data analytics in the automotive industry’, The TQM Journal 36(9), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1108/tqm-05-2023-0137
Huang, M.H. & Rust, R.T., 2023, ‘Artificial intelligence in service’, Journal of Service Research, 26(1), 3–21.
Jacob, B.M., Thomas, S. & Joseph, J., 2024, ‘Over two decades of research on choice overload: An overview and research agenda’, International Journal of Consumer Studies 48(2), e13029. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.13029
Jacob, F., Pez, V. & Volle, P., 2023, ‘Shifting to phygital experience management with design science: A six-step method to manage customer journeys’, Journal of Strategic Marketing 31(5), 961–982. https://doi.org/10.1080/0965254X.2021.2016894
Jankovic-Zugic, A., Medic, N., Pavlovic, M., Todorovic, T. & Rakic, S., 2023, ‘Servitization 4.0 as a trigger for sustainable business: Evidence from automotive digital supply chain’, Sustainability 15(3), 2217. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15032217
Kamalaldin, A., Linde, L., Sjödin, D. & Parida, V., 2020, ‘Transforming provider-customer relationships in digital servitization: A relational view on digitalization’, Industrial Marketing Management 89, 306–325. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2020.02.004
Kanwal, R. & Yousaf, S., 2019, ‘Impact of service innovation on customer satisfaction: An evidence from Pakistani banking industry’, Emerging Economy Studies 5(2), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1177/0976747919870876
Keiningham, T.L., Ball, J., Benoit, S., Bruce, H.L., Buoye, A.J., Dzenkovska, J., et al., 2017, ‘The interplay of customer experience and commitment’, Journal of Services Marketing 31(2). https://doi.org/10.1108/JSM-09-2016-0337
Kim, S., Connerton, T.P. & Park, C., 2022, ‘Transforming the automotive retail: Drivers for customers’ omnichannel BOPS (buy online & pick up in store) behavior’, Journal of Business Research 139, 411–425. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.09.070
Lusch, R.F. & Nambisan, S., 2015, ‘Service innovation: A service-dominant logic perspective’, MIS Quarterly 39(1), 155–175. https://doi.org/10.25300/MISQ/2015/39.1.07
Mahmoud, M.A., Hinson, R.E. & Anim, P.A., 2018, ‘Service innovation and customer satisfaction: The role of customer value creation’, European Journal of Innovation Management 21(3), 402–422. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJIM-09-2017-0117
Maurer, I., Kramer, N. & Quidwai, K., 2025, ‘Boosting auto sales productivity: A playbook for excellence’, Report, McKinsey & Company, viewed 20 April 2026, from https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/automotive-and-assembly/our-insights/boosting-auto-sales-productivity-a-playbook-for-excellence.
McKnight, D.H., Choudhury, V. & Kacmar, C., 2002, ‘Developing and validating trust measures for e-commerce: An integrative typology’, Information Systems Research 13(3), 334–359. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.13.3.334.81
Miguel, P.M.D., De-Pablos-Heredero, C., Montes, J.L. & García, A., 2022, ‘Impact of dynamic capabilities on customer satisfaction through digital transformation in the automotive sector’, Sustainability 14(8), 4772. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14084772
Morgan, N.A. & Feng, H., 2024, ‘Marketing capabilities and Shelby D. Hunt: Contributions, current state, and the future’, Journal of Marketing Management 40(13–14), 1224–1244. https://doi.org/10.1080/0267257X.2024.2311110
Morgan, R.M. & Hunt, S.D., 1994, ‘The commitment-trust theory of relationship marketing’, Journal of Marketing 58(3), 20–38. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224299405800302
Mpinganjira, M., Roberts-Lombard, M. & Svensson, G., 2017, ‘Validating the relationship between trust, commitment, economic and non-economic satisfaction in South African buyer-supplier relationships’, Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing 32(3), 421–431. https://doi.org/10.1108/JBIM-04-2015-0073
National Association of Automobile Manufacturers of South Africa (NAAMSA), 2025, NAAMSA releases November 2025 new vehicle sales stats: Domestic sales surge as South Africa’s auto market maintains momentum drawing to year end, media release, 01 December, viewed 12 December 2025, from https://naamsa.net/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/20251201-naamsa-November-2025-New-Vehicle-Sales-Media-Release.pdf.
National Association of Automobile Manufacturers of South Africa (NAAMSA), 2026, NAAMSA releases January 2026 new vehicle sales stats: South Africa’s automotive market records steady start to the year, media release, 02 February, viewed 06 March 2026, from https://naamsa.net/wp-content/uploads/2026/02/20260202-naamsa-January-2026-New-Vehicle-Sales-Media-Release.pdf.
Oliver, R.L., 1980, ‘A cognitive model of the antecedents and consequences of satisfaction decisions’, Journal of Marketing Research 17(4), 460–469. https://doi.org/10.2307/3150499
Ostrom, A.L., Field, J.M., Fotheringham, D., Subramony, M., Gustafsson, A., Lemon, K.N., et al., 2021, ‘Service research priorities: Managing and delivering service in turbulent times’, Journal of Service Research 24(3), 329–353. https://doi.org/10.1177/10946705211021915
Otto, A.S., Szymanski, D.M. & Varadarajan, R., 2020, ‘Customer satisfaction and firm performance: Insights from over a quarter century of empirical research’, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 48(3), 543–564. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-019-00657-7
Ozuem, W., Willis, M., Howell, K., Ranfagni, S. & Rovai, S., 2024, ‘Examining user-generated content, service failure recovery and customer–brand relationships: An exploration through commitment-trust theory’, Internet Research 34(3), 784–809. https://doi.org/10.1108/INTR-07-2022-0580
Palmatier, R.W., Dant, R.P. & Grewal, D., 2007, ‘A comparative longitudinal analysis of theoretical perspectives of interorganizational relationship performance’, Journal of Marketing 71(4), 172–194. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.71.4.172
Pansari, A. & Kumar, V., 2017, ‘Customer engagement: The construct, antecedents, and consequences’, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 45, 294–311. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-016-0485-6
Rather, R.A., Hollebeek, L.D. & Rasoolimanesh, S.M., 2022, ‘First-time versus repeat tourism customer engagement, experience, and value cocreation: An empirical investigation’, Journal of Travel Research 61(3), 549–564. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287521997572
Reydet, S. & Carsana, L., 2017, ‘The effect of digital design in retail banking on customers’ commitment and loyalty: The mediating role of positive affect’, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 37, 132–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2017.04.003
Steinhoff, L., Arli, D., Weaven, S. & Kozlenkova, I.V., 2019, ‘Online relationship marketing’, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 47(3), 369–393. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-018-0621-6
Sukwadi, R., 2017, ‘The moderating role of service innovation on the relationship between customer satisfaction and customer value: A case of 3-star hotels in Jakarta’, International Journal of Services, Economics and Management 8(1/2), 18–34. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJSEM.2017.084480
Sumiyana, S. & Komariyah, E.F., 2024, ‘Satisfaction and trust should first be nested in commitment before affecting loyalty in the use of mobile shopping applications’, SAGE Open 14(4), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440241288020
Ta, D.T. & Yang, C.-H., 2018, ‘Exploring the impacts of service innovation on customer satisfaction in the telecom industry: A perspective from interactive and supportive service innovations’, International Journal of Innovation Management 22(7), 1850053. https://doi.org/10.1142/S1363919618500536
Tai, Y.-F., Wang, Y.-C. & Luo, C.-C., 2021, ‘Technology- or human-related service innovation? Enhancing customer satisfaction, delight, and loyalty in the hospitality industry’, Service Business 15, 667–694. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11628-021-00461-w
Terason, S., Pattanayanon, P. & Phawitpiriyakliti, C., 2025, ‘From interaction to loyalty: The role of digital engagement in automobile consumers’, Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies 2025(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1155/hbe2/9912657
Van Phuong, N., Dung, T.V., Loc, N.V., Thanh, T.T.M., Duong, N.T.T., Trang, D. et al., 2024, ‘Digital transformation and customer satisfaction in the retail industry in emerging countries: Case study in Hanoi, Vietnam’, Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology 8(5), 1843–1853. https://doi.org/10.55214/25768484.v8i5.1918
Van Tonder, E., Petzer, D.J. & Van Zyl, K., 2017, ‘A mediated model of relationship quality factors affecting behavioural intention at a luxury motor vehicle dealership’, European Business Review 29(1), 43–60. https://doi.org/10.1108/ebr-08-2016-0113
Van Tonder, E., Fullerton, S. & De Beer, L.T., 2020, ‘Cognitive and emotional factors contributing to green customer citizenship behaviours: A moderated mediation model’, Journal of Consumer Marketing 37(6), 639–650. https://doi.org/10.1108/JCM-06-2019-3268
Van Vuuren, T., Roberts-Lombard, M. & Van Tonder, E., 2012, ‘Customer satisfaction, trust and commitment as predictors of customer loyalty within an optometric practice environment’, Southern African Business Review 16(3), 81–96. https://doi.org/10.4102/ac.v12i1.137
Verhoef, P.C., Broekhuizen, T., Bart, Y., Bhattacharya, A., Dong, J.Q., Fabian, N. et al., 2021, ‘Digital transformation: A multidisciplinary reflection and research agenda’, Journal of Business Research 122, 889–901. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.09.022
Wagner, G., Schramm-Klein, H. & Steinmann, S., 2020, ‘Online retailing across e-channels and e-channel touchpoints: Empirical studies of consumer behavior in the multichannel e-commerce environment’, Journal of Business Research 107, 256–270. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.10.048
Walker, L. & Proff, H., 2024, South African extract of 2024 global automotive consumer study: Tracking consumer trends in the automotive industry, viewed 12 December 2025, from https://www.deloitte.com/za/en/Industries/automotive/perspectives/global-automotive-consumer-study0.html.
Wan, X., Jha, A.K., Kazantsev, N. & Boh, W.F., 2023, ‘Online-to-offline platforms: Examining the effects of demand-side usage on supply-side decisions’, Information & Management 60(2), 103757. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2023.103757
Witell, L., Snyder, H., Gustafsson, A., Fombelle, P. & Kristensson, P., 2016, ‘Defining service innovation: A review and synthesis’, Journal of Business Research 69(8), 2863–2872. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.12.055
Woo, H., Kim, S.J. & Wang, H., 2021, ‘Understanding the role of service innovation behavior on business customer performance and loyalty’, Industrial Marketing Management 93, 41–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2020.12.011
Wu, H.-C., Xu, H. & Wu, T.-P., 2024, ‘Service innovation, experiential relationship quality and shopping outcomes in a smart unmanned store’, Journal of Marketing Communications 30(3), 344–367. https://doi.org/10.1080/13527266.2022.2113910
|
Hide
Show all
Email this article (Login required)
