Upload
bruce-janey
View
213
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Messung und statistische Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
KF Qualitätsmanagement Vertiefungskurs V
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
2
Outline
Customer satisfaction measurement The Structural Equation Model (SEM) Estimation of SEMs Evaluation of SEMs Practice of SEM-Analysis
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
3
The ACSI Model
Ref.: http://www.theacsi.org/model.htm
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
4
ACSI-Model: Latent Variables Customer Expectations: combine customers’
experiences and information about it via media, advertising, salespersons, and word-of-mouth from other customers
Perceived Quality: overall quality, reliability, the extent to which a product/service meets the customer’s needs
Customer Satisfaction: overall satisfaction, fulfillment of expectations, comparison with ideal
Perceived Value: overall price given quality and overall quality given price
Customer Complaints: percentage of respondents who reported a problem
Customer Loyalty: likelihood to purchase at various price points
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
5
Baseline
*
Q2 1995
Q2 1996
Q2 1997
Q2 1998
Q2 1999
Q2 2000
Q2 2001
Q2 2002
Q2 2003
Q22004
% Changes
% Changes
MANUFACTURING/DURABLES
79.2 79.8 78.8 78.4 77.9 77.3 79.4 78.7 79.0 79.2 78.3 -1.1% -1.1%
Personal Computers 78 75 73 70 71 72 74 71 71 72 74 2.8% -5.1%
Apple Computer, Inc. 77 75 76 70 69 72 75 73 73 77 81 5.2% 5.2%
Dell Inc. NM NM NM 72 74 76 80 78 76 78 79 1.3% 9.7%
Gateway, Inc. NM NM NM NM 76 76 78 73 72 69 74 7.2% -2.6%
All Others NM 70 73 72 69 69 68 67 70 69 71 2.9% 1.4%
Hewlett-Packard Company – HP 78 80 77 75 72 74 74 73 71 70 71 1.4% -9.0%
Hewlett-Packard Company – Compaq 78 77 74 67 72 71 71 69 68 68 69 1.5% -11.5%
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
6
The European Customer Satisfaction Index (ECSI)
Ref.: http://www.swics.ch/ecsi/index.html
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
7
ACSIe-Model for Food Retail
Custo-mer Satis-
faction
LoyaltyExpec-tations
PerceivedQuality
Value
EmotionalFactor
Hackl et al. (2000)Latent variables and path coefficients
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
8
Austrian Food Retail Market Pilot for an Austrian National CS Index (Zuba, 1997) Data collection: December 1996 by Dr Fessel & GfK
(professional market research agency) 839 interviews, 327 complete observations Austria-wide active food retail chains (1996: ~50%
from the 10.5 B’EUR market)Billa: well-assorted medium-sized outletsHofer: limited range at good pricesMerkur: large-sized supermarkets with comprehensive range Meinl: top in quality and service
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
9
The Data
Indicators Latent
total expected quality (EGESQ), expected compliance with demands (EANFO), expected shortcomings (EMANG)
Expectations (E)
total perceived quality (OGESQ), perceived compliance with needs (OANFO), perceived shortcomings (OMANG)
Perceived Quality (Q)
value for price (VAPRI), price for value (PRIVA) Value (P)
total satisfaction (CSTOT), fulfilled expectations (ERWAR), comparison with ideal (IDEAL)
Customer Sa-tisfaction (CS)
number of oral complaints (NOBES), number of written complaints (NOBRI)
Voice (V)
repurchase probability (WIEDE), tolerance against price-change (PRVER)
Loyalty (L)
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
10
The Emotional Factor
Principal component analysis of satisfaction driversstaff (availability, politeness) outlet (make-up, presentation of merchandise, cleanliness)range (freshness and quality, richness)price-value ratio (value for price, price for value)customer orientation (access to outlet, shopping hours, queuing time for checkout, paying modes, price information, sales, availability of sales)
identifies (Zuba, 1997)staff, outlet, range: “Emotional factor”price-value ratio: “Value”customer orientation: “Cognitive factor”
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
11
Structural Equation Models
Combine three concepts Latent variables
Pearson (1904), psychometrics Factor analysis model
Path analysis Wright (1934), biometrics Technique to analyze systems of relations
Simultaneous regression models Econometrics
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
12
Customer Satisfaction
Is the result of the customer‘s comparison of his/her expectations with his/her experiences
has consequences on loyalty future profits of the supplier
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
13
Expectation vs. Experience
Expectation reflects customers‘ needs offer on the market image of the supplier etc.
Experiences include perceived performance/quality subjective assessment etc.
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
14
CS-Model: Path Diagram
Custo-mer Satis-
faction
LoyaltyPerceived
Quality
Expecta-tions
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
15
A General CS-Model
Custo-mer Satis-
faction
LoyaltyPerceived
Quality
Expecta-tions
Voice
Profits
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
16
CS-Model: Structure
tofrom
EX PQ CS LY
EX X X 0
PQ 0 X 0
CS 0 0 X
LY 0 0 0
EX: expectationPQ: perceived qualityCS: customer satisfactionLY: loyalty
Recursive structure: triangular form of relations
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
17
CS-Model: Equations
PQ = 1 + 11EX + 1
CS = 2 + 21PQ + 21EX + 2
LY = 3 + 32CS + 3
Simultaneous equations model in latent variables
Exogenous: EXEndogenous: PQ, CS, LYError terms (noises): 1, 2, 3
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
18
Simple Linear RegressionModel: Y = + X + Observations: (xi, yi), i=1,…,n
Fitted Model: Ŷ = a + cXOLS-estimates a, c:
minimize the sum of squared residuals
sxy: sample-covariance of X and Y
2,
ˆ( ) ( , ) mini iiy y S
2 ,xy
x
s
sc a y cx s
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
19
Criteria of Model FitR2: coefficient of determination
the squared correlation between Y and Ŷ: R2 = ryŷ
2
t-Test: Test of H0: =0 against H1:≠0 t=c/s.e.(c)
s.e.(c): standard error of cF-Test: Test of H0: R2=0 against H1: R2≠0
follows for large n the F-distribution with n-2 and 2 df
2
2
2
1 2
RF
R n
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
20
Multiple Linear RegressionModel: Y = + X1+ + Xk+= + x’ + Observations: (xi1,…, xik, yi), i=1,…,nIn Matrix-Notation: y = + X + y, : n-vectors, :k-vector, X: nxk-matrixFitted Model: ŷ = a + XcOLS-estimates a, c:
R2 = ryŷ2
F-Testt-Test
11 1( ' ) ' , ... k kc X X X y a y c x c x
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
21
Simultaneous Equations ModelsA 2-equations model:
PQ = 1 + 11EX + 1
CS = 2 + 21PQ + 21EX + 2
In matrix-notation: Y = BY + X + with 1
2
1 11
21 2 21
, ,
0 0,
0
PQY X EX
CS
B
path coefficients
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
22
Simultaneous Equations ModelsModel: Y = BY + X +
Y, : m-vectors, B: (mxm)-matrix :(mxK)-matrix, X: K-vector
Problems: Simultaneous equation bias: OLS-estimates of
coefficients are not consistentIdentifiability: Can coefficients be consistently
estimated?
Some assumptions:
: E()=0, Cov() =
Exogeneity: Cov(X,) = 0
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
23
Path Analytic Model
CS
PQ
EX
Var(1) = EX2
21 1
22 2
0
0Var
PQ = 11EX + 1
CS = 21PQ + 21EX + 2
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
24
Path Analysis Wright (1921, 1934) A multivariate technique Model: Variables may be
structurally related structurally unrelated, but correlated
Decomposition of covariances allows to write covariances as functions of structural parameters
Definition of direct and indirect effects
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
25
Example
CS
PQ
EX
CS,EX = 21EX + 21PQ,EX
= 212EX + 11212
EX
CS,EX = 21 + 1121 with standardized variable EX:
( )YX Yi iXi Y X
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
26
Direct and Indirect Effects
CS,EX = 21 + 1121
Direct effect: coefficient that links independent with dependent variable; e.g., 21 is direct effect of EX on CS
Indirect effect: effect of one variable on another via one or more intervening variable(s), e.g., 1121
Total indirect effect: sum of indirect effects between two variables
Total effect: sum of direct and total indirect effects between two variables
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
27
Decomposition of Covariance yx
( )YX YI IXI Y X
( )I Y X : variable on path from X to Y
YI: path coefficient of variable I to Y
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
28
First Law of Path Analysis
Decomposition of covariance xy between Y and X:
Assumptions: Exogenous (X) and endogenous variables (Y) have
mean zero Errors or noises ()
have mean zero and equal variances across observations
are uncorrelated across observations are uncorrelated with exogenous variables are uncorrelated across equations
( )YX Yi iXi Y X
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
29
Identification
PQ = 11EX + 1 Y1 = 11X + 1
CS = 21PQ + 21EX + 2 Y2 = 21Y1 + 21X + 2
In matrix-notation: Y = BY + X +
Number of parameters: p=6Model is identified, if all parameters can be expressed
as functions of variances/covariances of observed variables
211 2 1
221 21 2
0 0 0, , ( ) ,
0 0EXB
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
30
Identification, cont’dY1 = 11X + 1
Y2 = 21Y1 + 21X + 2
1X =11 X2
2X = 211X + 21X2
21 = 2112 + 211X
X2 = X
2
y12 = 111X+1
2
y22 = 2121 + 212X+2
2
p=6
first 3 equations allow unique solution for pathcoefficients, last three forvariances of and
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
31
Condition for Identification Just-identified: all parameters can be uniquely
derived from functions of variances/covariances Over-identified: at least one parameter is not
uniquely determined Under-identified: insufficient number of
variances/covariances
Necessary, but not sufficient condition for identification: number of variances/covariances at least as large as number of parameters
A general and operational rule for checking identification has not been found
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
32
Latent variables and Indicators
Latent variables (LVs) or constructs or factors are unobservable, but
We might find indicators or manifest variables (MVs) for the LVs that can be used as measures of the latent variable
Indicators are imperfect measures of the latent variable
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
33
Indicators for “Expectation”
EX
E3
E2
E1
E1: When you became a customer of AB-Bank, you probably knew something about them. How would you grade your expectations on a scale of 1 (very low) to 10 (very high)?
E2: Now think about the different services they offer, such as bank loans, rates, … Rate your expectations on a scale of 1 to 10?
E3: Finally rate your overall expectations on a scale of 1 to 10?
1
2
3
From: Swedish CSB Questionnaire, Banks: Private Customers
E1, E2, E3: „block“ of LVs for Expectation
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
34
Notation
X3
X2
X1
1
2
3
1
2
3
X1=1+1
X2=2+2
X3=3+3
: latent variable, factorXi: indicators, manifest
variablesi: factor loadingsi: measurement errors, noise
Some properties: LV: unit variancenoise i: has mean zero, variance i
2, uncorrela- ted with other noises
“reflective” indicators
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
35
Notation
X3
X2
X1
1
2
3
1
2
3
X1=1+1
X2=2+2
X3=3+3
X = +
In matrix-notation:
with vectors X, , and e.g., X = (X1, X2, X3)‘
: latent variable, factorXi: indicators, manifest
variablesi: factor loadingsi: measurement error, noise
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
36
CS-Model: Path Diagram
CS
PQ
EX
Q1
Q2
Q3
E3
E2
E1
C1
C2
C3
1
3
2
3
2
1
4
5
6
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
37
SEM-Model: Path Diagram
1
Y1
Y2
Y3
X3
X2
X1
Y4
Y5
Y6
1
3
2
3
2
1
4
5
6
=++
X = x+Y= y+
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
38
SEM-Model: Notation
211 2 1
221 21 2
0 0 0, , ( ) ,
0 0EX
=++
X = x+Y= y+
11 12 1311 12 13
11 12 13
0 0 0, , ,
0 0 0x y
X, : 3-component vectorY, : 6-component vector
Inner relations, inner model
Outer relations, measurement model
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
39
Statistical Assumptions Error terms of inner model () have
zero means constant variances across observations are uncorrelated across observations are uncorrelated with exogenous variables
Error terms of measurement models () have zero means constant variances across observations are uncorrelated across observations are uncorrelated with latent variables and with each
other Latent variables are standardized
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
40
Covariance Matrix of Manifest VariablesUnrestricted covariance matrix (order: K = kx+ky)
= Var{(X’,Y’)’}
Model-implied covariance matrix 1 2
2 3
1 11
12
3
( ) , ( , , , , , , , )
( ) ( )[( ) ]
( ) [ ]
[ ]
x y
x y
y x
x x
A A
A A
A I I
A I
A
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
41
Estimation of the Parameters Covariance fitting methods
search for values of parameters so that the model-implied covariance matrix fits the observed unrestricted covariance matrix of the MVs
LISREL (LInear Structural RELations): Jöreskog (1973), Keesling (1972), Wiley (1973)
Software LISREL by Jöreskog & Sörbom PLS techniques
partition of in estimable subsets of parameters iterative optimizations provide successive
approximations for LV scores and parameters Wold (1973, 1980)
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
42
Discrepancy FunctionThe discrepancy or fitting function
F(S;) = F(S; )is a measure of the “distance” between the model-implied covariance-matrix and the estimated unrestricted covariance-matrix S
Properties of the discrepancy function: F(S;) ≥ 0; F(S;) = 0 if S=
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
43
Covariance Fitting (LISREL) Estimates of the parameters are derived by
F(S;) min
Minimization of (K: number of indicators)
F(S;) = log|| – log|S| + trace (S-1) – K
gives ML-estimates, if the manifest variables are independently, multivariate normally distributed
Iterative Algorithm (Newton-Raphson type) Identification Choice of starting values is crucial Other choices of F result in estimation methods like OLS and
GLS; ADF (asymptotically distribution free)
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
44
PLS Techniques Estimates factor scores for latent variables Estimates structural parameters (path coefficients,
loading coefficients), based on estimated factor scores, using the principle of least squares
Maximizes the predictive accuracy “Predictor specification”, viz. that E(|) equals the
systematic part of the model, implies E(|)=0: the error term has (conditional) mean zero
No distributional assumptions beyond those on 1st and 2nd order moments
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
45
The PLS-AlgorithmStep 1: Estimation of factor scores
1. Outer approximation2. Calculation of inner weights3. Inner approximation4. Calculation of outer weights
Step 2: Estimation of path and loading coefficients by minimizing Var() and Var()
Step 3: Estimation of location parameters (intercepts) Bo from = Bo + B + + o from X = o + x+
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
46
Estimation of Factor Scores
Factor i: realizations Yin, n=1,…,NYin
(o): outer approximation of Yin
Yin(i): inner approximation of Yin
Indicator Yij: observations yijn; j=1,…,Ji; n=1,…,N1. Outer approximation: Yin
(o)=jwijyijn s.t. Var(Yi(o))=1
2. Inner weights: vih=sign(rih), if i and h adjacent; otherwise vih=0; rih=corr(i,h) (“centroid weighting”)
3. Inner approximation: Yin(i)=hvihYhn
(o) s.t. Var(Yi(i))=1
4. Outer weights: wij=corr(Yij,Yi(i))
Start: choose arbitrary values for wij
Repeat 1. through 4. until outer weights converge
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
47
Example
CS
PQ
EX
Q1
Q2
Q3
E3
E2
E1
C1
C2
C3
1
3
2
3
2
1
4
5
6
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
48
Example, cont’dStarting values wEX,1,…,wEX,3,wPQ,1,…,wPQ,3,wCS,1,…,wCS,3 Outer approximation:
EXn(o) = jwEX,jEjn; similar PQn
(o), CSn(o);
standardizedInner approximation:
EXn(i) = + PQn
(o) + CSn(o)
PQn(i) = + EXn
(o) + CSn(o)
CSn(i) = + EXn
(o) + PQn(o)
standardizedOuter weights:
wEX,j = corr(Ej,EX(i)), j=1,…,3; similar wPQ,j, wCS,j
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
49
Choice of Inner WeightsCentroid weighting scheme: Yin
(i)=hvihYhn(o)
vij=sign(rih), if i and h adjacent, vij=0 otherwise
with rih=corr(i,h); these weights are obtained if vih are chosen to be +1 or -1 and Var(Yi
(i)) is maximized
Weighting schemes:h predecessor h successor
centroid sign(rih) sign(rih)
factor, PC rih rih
path bih rih
bih: coefficient in regression of i on h
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
50
Measurement Model: ExamplesLatent variables from Swedish CSB Model1. Expectation
E1: new customer feelings
E2: special products/services expectations
E3: overall expectation
2. Perceived QualityQ1: range of products/services Q2: quality of serviceQ3: clarity of information on products/services Q4: opening hours and appearance of locationQ5: etc.
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
51
Measurement ModelsReflective model: each indicator is reflecting the latent
variable (example 1)Yij = iji + ij
Yij is called a reflective or effect indicator (of i)Formative model: (example 2)
i = y'Yi + i
y is a vector of ki weights; Yij are called formative or cause indicators
Hybrid or MIMIC model (for “multiple indicators and multiple causes”)
Choice between formative and reflective depends on the substantive theory
Formative models often used for exogenous, reflective and MIMIC models for endogenous variables
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
52
Estimation of Outer Weights “Mode A” estimation of Yi
(o): reflective measurement model weight wij is coefficient from simple regression of Yi
(i) on Yij: wij = corr(Yij,Yi(i))
“Mode B” estimation of Yi(o): formative
measurement model weight wij is coefficient of Yij from multiple regression of Yi
(i) on Yij, j=1,…,Jimulticollinearity?!
MIMIC model
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
53
Properties of EstimatorsA general proof for convergence of the PLS-algorithm
does not exists; practitioners experience no problems
Factor scores are inconsistent but “consistent at large”: consistency is achieved with increasing sample size and block size
Loading coefficients are inconsistent and seem to be overestimated
Path coefficients are inconsistent and seem to be underestimated
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
54
ACSI Model: Results
Custo-mer Satis-
faction
LoyaltyExpec-tations
PerceivedQuality
Value
Voice
EQS-estimates
PLS-estimates
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
55
Evaluation of SEM-Models Depends on estimation method
Covariance-fitting methods: distributional assumptions, optimal parameter estimates, factor indeterminacy
PLS path modeling: non-parametric, optimal prediction accuracy, LV scores
Step 1: Inspection of estimation results (R2, parameter estimates, standard errors, LV scores, residuals, etc.)
Step 2: Assessment of fit Covariance-fitting methods: global measures PLS path modeling: partial fitting measures
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
56
Inspection of Results Covariance-fitting methods: global optimization
Model parameters and their standard errors; do they confirm theory?
Correlation residuals: sij-sij() Graphical methods
PLS techniques: iterative optimization of outer models and inner model Model parameters Resampling procedures like blindfolding or jackknifing
give standard errors of model parameters LV scores Graphical methods
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
57
Fit Indices Covariance-fitting methods: covariance fit
measures such as Chi-square statistics Goodness of Fit Index (GFI), AGFI Normed Fit Index (NFI), NNFI, CFI Etc. Basis is the discrepancy function
PLS path modeling: prediction-based measures Communality Redundancy Stone-Geisser’s Q2
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
58
Chi-square Statistic Test of H0: = () against non-specified alternative Test-statistic X2=(N-1)F(S;( )) If model is just identified (c=p): X2=0 [c=K(K+1)/2, p:
number of parameters in ] Under usual regularity conditions (normal distribution,
ML-estimation), X2 is asymptotically 2(c-p)-distributed Non-significant X2 indicate: the over-identified model
does not differ from a just-identified version Problem: X2 increases with increasing N Some prefer X2/(c-p) to X2 (has reduced sensitivity to
sample size); rule of thumb: X2/(c-p) < 3 is acceptable
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
59
Goodness of Fit IndicesGoodness of Fit Index (Jöreskog & Sörbom):
Portion of observed covariances explained by the model-implied covariances
“How much better fits the model as compared to no model at all”
Ranges from 0 (poor fit) to 1 (perfect fit) Rule of thumb: GFI > 0.9 AGFI penalizes model complexity:
ˆ[ , ( )]1
[ , ( )]
F SGFI
F S O
ˆ[ , ( )]1
[ , ( )]
c F SAGFI
c p F S O
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
60
Other Fit Indices Normed Fit Index, NFI (Bentler & Bonett)
Similar to GFI, but compares with a baseline model, typically the independence model (indicators are uncorrelated)
Ranges from 0 (poor fit) to 1 (perfect fit) Rule of thumb: NFI > 0.9
Comparative Fit Index, CFI (Bentler) Less depending of sample size than NFI
Non-Normed Fit Index, NNFI (Bentler & Bonett) Also known as Tucker-Lewis Index Adjusted for model complexity
Root mean squared error of approximation, RMSEA (Steiger): ˆ[ , ( )] /( )RMSEA F S c p
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
61
Assessment of PLS Results Not a single but many optimization steps; not a
global measure but many measures of various aspects of results
Indices for assessing the predictive relevance Portions of explained variance (R2) Communality, redundancy, etc. Stone-Geisser’s Q2
Reliability indices NFI, assuming normality of indicators Allows comparisons with covariance-fitting
results
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
62
Some IndicesAssessment of diagonal fit (proportion of explained
variances) SMC (squared multiple correlation coefficient) R2:
(average) proportion of the variance of LVs that is explained by other LVs; concerns the inner model
Communality H2: (average) proportion of the variance of indicators that is explained by the LVs directly connected to it; concerns the outer model
Redundancy F2: (average) proportion of the variance of indicators that is explained by predictor LVs of its own LV
r2: proportion of explained variance of indicators
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
63
Some Indices, cont’dAssessment of non-diagonal fit Explained indicator covariances
rs = 1 c/swith c = rms(C), s = rms(S); C: estimate of Cov()
Explained latent variable correlation
rr = 1 q/rwith q = rms(Q), r = rms(Cov(Y)); Q: estimate of Cov()
reY = rms (Cov(e,Y)), e: outer residuals reu = rms (Cov(e,u)), u: inner residuals
rms(A) = (ij aij2)1/2: root mean squared covariances (diagonal elements of
symmetric A excluded from summation)
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
64
Stone-Geisser’s Q2
Similar to R2
E: sum of squared prediction errors; O: sum of squared deviations from mean
Prediction errors from resampling (blindfolding, jackknifing)
E.g., communality of Yij, an indicator of i
2 1E
QO
22
2
ˆ[ ( )]1
[ ]ijn ij inn
ijcijn ijn
y YQ
y y
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
65
Lohmöller’s Advice Check fit of outer model
Low unexplained portion of indicator variances and covariances
High communalities in reflective blocks, low residual covariances
Residual covariances between blocks close to zero Covariances between outer residuals and latent
variables close to zero Check fit of inner model
Low unexplained portion of latent variable indicator variances and covariances
Check fit of total model High redundancy coefficient Low covariances of inner and outer residuals
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
66
ACSI Model: Results
Custo-mer Satis-
faction
LoyaltyExpec-tations
PerceivedQuality
Value
Voice
EQS-estimates
PLS-estimates
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
67
Diagnostics: EQS
ACSI ACSIe
247.5 378.7
df 81 173
NNFI 0.898 0.930
RMSEA 0.079 0.060
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
68
Diagnostics: PLS (centroid weighting)
ACSI ACSI e Hui Schenk
R2 0.29 0.35 0.43 0.40
Q2 0.36 0.41 0.58 0.49
rr 0.47 0.55 0.58 0.59
H2 0.71 0.64 0.64 0.64
F2 0.22 0.24 0.30 0.26
r2 0.63 0.63 0.57 0.60
reY 0.26 0.24 0.19 0.09
reu 0.19 0.17 0.16 0.08
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
69
Practice of SEM Analysis Theoretical basis Data
Scaling: metric or nominal (in LISREL not standard) Sample-size: a good choice is 10p (p: number of
parameters); <5p cases might result in unstable estimates; large number of cases will result in large values of X2
Reflective indicators are assumed to be uni-dimensional; it is recommended to use principal axis extraction, Cronbach’s alpha and similar to confirm the suitability of data
Model Identification must be checked for covariance fitting
methods Indicators for LV can be formative or reflective; formative
indicators not supported in LISREL
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
70
Practice of SEM Analalysis cont’d
Model LISREL allows for more general covariance structures
e.g., correlation of measurement errors
Estimation Repeat estimation with varying starting values
Diagnostic checks Use graphical tools like plots of residuals etc. Check each measurement model Check each structural equation Lohmöller’s advice Model trimming Stepwise model building (Hui, 1982; Schenk, 2001)
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
71
LISREL vs PLS Models
PLS assumes recursive inner structure PLS allows for higher complexity w.r.t. B, , and ; LISREL
w.r.t. and Estimation method
Distributional assumptions in PLS not needed Formative measurement model in PLS Factor scores in PLS PLS: biased estimates, consistency at large LISREL: ML-theory In PLS: diagnostics much richer
Empirical facts LISREL needs in general larger samples LISREL needs more computation
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
72
The Extended Model
Custo-mer Satis-
faction
LoyaltyExpec-tations
PerceivedQuality
Value
EmotionalFactor
EQS-estimates
PLS-estimates
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
73
Diagnostics: EQS
ACSI ACSI e
247.5 378.7
df 81 173
NNFI 0.898 0.930
RMSEA 0.079 0.060
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
74
Diagnostics: PLS (centroid weighting)
ACSI ACSI e Hui Schenk
R2 0.29 0.35 0.43 0.40
Q2 0.36 0.41 0.58 0.49
rr 0.47 0.55 0.58 0.59
H2 0.71 0.64 0.64 0.64
F2 0.22 0.24 0.30 0.26
r2 0.63 0.63 0.57 0.60
reY 0.26 0.24 0.19 0.09
reu 0.19 0.17 0.16 0.08
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
75
Model Building: Hui’s Approach
Custo-mer Satis-
faction
Loyalty
Expec-tations
PerceivedQuality
Value
EmotionalFactor
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
76
Model Building: Schenk’s Approach
Custo-mer Satis-
faction
Expec-tations
PerceivedQuality
Value
EmotionalFactor
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
77
The end
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
78
Data-driven Specification
No solid a priori knowledge about relations among variables
Stepwise regressionSearch of the “best” modelForward selectionBackward eliminationProblem: omitted variable bias
General to specific modeling
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
79
Stepwise SE Model Building
Hui (1982): models with interdependent inner relations
Schenk (2001): guaranties causal structure, i.e., triangular matrix B of path coefficients in the inner model
η = B η + ζ
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
80
Stepwise SE Model Building
Hui’s algorithm
Stage 11. Calculate case values Yij for LVs ηi as principal
component of corresponding block, calculate R = Corr(Y) 2. Choose for each endogenous LV the one with highest
correlation to form a simple regression3. Repeat until a stable model is reached
a. PLS-estimate the model, calculate case values, and recalculate R
b. Drop from each equation LVs with t-value |t|<1,65c. Add in each equation the LV with highest partial
correlation with dependent LV
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
81
Stepwise SE Model Building
Hui’s algorithm, cont’d
Stage 2
1. Use rank condition for checking identifiability of each equation
2. Use 2SLS for estimating the path coefficients in each equation
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
82
Hui’s vs. Schenk’s Algorithm
Hui’s algorithm is not restricted to a causal structure; allows cycles and an arbitrary structure of matrix B
Schenk’s algorithm uses an iterative procedure similar to that used
by Hui makes use of a priori information about the
structure of the causal chain connecting the latent variables
latent variables are to be sorted
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
83
Stepwise SE Model Building
Schenk’s algorithm
1. Calculate case values Yij for LVs ηi as principal component of corresponding block, calculate R = Corr(Y)
2. Choose pair of LVs with highest correlation3. Repeat until a stable model is reached
a. PLS-estimate the model, calculate case values, and recalculate R
b. Drop LVs with non-significant t-valuec. Add LV with highest correlation with already included
LVs
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
84
Data, special CS dimensions
Staff 2 availability1 (PERS), politeness1 (FREU)
Outlet 3 make-up1 (GEST), presentation of mer-chandise1 (PRAE), cleanliness1 (SAUB)
Range 2 freshness and quality (QUAL), richness (VIEL)
Customer-orientation
7 access to outlet (ERRE), shopping hours (OEFF), queuing time for checkout1 (WART), paying modes1 (ZAHL), price information1 (PRAU), sales (SOND), availability of sales (VERF)
1 Dimension of “Emotional Factor”
3.12.2004 Messung & Analyse von Kundenzufriedenheit
85
ReferencesC. Fornell (1992), “A National Customer Satisfaction Barometer:
The Swedish Experience”. Journal of Marketing, (56), 6-21.C. Fornell and Jaesung Cha (1994), “Partial Least Squares”, pp.
52-78 in R.P. Bagozzi (ed.), Advanced Methods of Marketing Research. Blackwell.
J.B. Lohmöller (1989), Latent variable path modeling with partial least squares. Physica-Verlag.
H. Wold (1982), “Soft modeling. The basic design and some extensions”, in: Vol.2 of Jöreskog-Wold (eds.), Systems under Indirect Observation. North-Holland.
H. Wold (1985), “Partial Least Squares”, pp. 581-591 in S. Kotz, N.L. Johnson (eds.), Encyclopedia of Statistical Sciences, Vol. 6. Wiley.