E-Loyalty through Relationship Quality: A Comparative Study of John Lewis and House of Fraser

This paper evaluates the concept of e-loyalty through relationship quality and compares John Lewis and House of Fraser in terms of their marketing strategies and customer satisfaction. It discusses the impact of e-service quality and customer satisfaction on loyalty in the context of internet retail shopping in the UK. The study also examines the role of service quality, customer satisfaction, and brand loyalty in the online marketplace. The findings suggest that both John Lewis and House of Fraser have strategically differentiated their offers and focused on providing exceptional customer service.

Running head: MARKETING
MARKETING
Name of the Student:
Name of the University:
Author note:

1MARKETING
Introduction
Contemporary businesses with the rapid development in electronic retailing (e-tailing) are
gaining competitive advantages by using technology in order to interact with customers. Hobbs
(2019) has indicated that such a rapid rate of internet advancement has led to an exceptional pace
of change in the domain of marketing. E-tailing has further expanded varied range of prospects
for marketers. Moreover, the introduction of e-commerce in shopping by traditional UK brick-
and-mortar retailers over the past one-decade or more has served as a highly advantageous form
of marketing to customers as well as retailers. Saghiri et al. (2017) have noted that for customer,
these factors imply to the convenience of shopping by using Internet services. These services
thus increasing the skill to seek for products, which are preferable and customers can assess their
prices and arrange delivery as per convenience. In the view of retailers, shopping through e-
commerce services offer undemanding access to wide-range of consumers and increases their
competence to provide extensive array of items on-line. Customers who cannot visit would
prefer these services physical stores due to lack of time. Studies of Adams (2015) have revealed
that retailers with the introduction of e-tailing have been able to develop their share of a rapidly
increasing sector of the market. Such a vital progression is likely to facilitate contemporary
retailers to perceive online grocery shopping as an alternative strategy for specific shopping
missions, objectives and needs of their consumers. The following paper will aim to evaluate
ways in which John Lewis has formed the concept of e-loyalty through relationship quality (RQ)
and further draw a comparative study between John Lewis and House of Fraser.

2MARKETING
Discussion
Relationship Quality and Customer Loyalty in Internet Retail Shopping in the UK
The UK Internet grocery market as per the report revealed by Mintel has been anticipated
to comprise the value of around £3.9 billion, which is accounts to be around 3.6% of all food
retail sales (Jones 2015). Thus, it is expected to increase with the rate of increase of the number
of households and their use of Internet services. Drawing relevance to these factors, it can be
stated that the increasing rate of internet grocery services are developing key opportunities as
well as major challenges across the sector. Reports of Adams (2015) have mentioned that
currently three leading UK supermarkets namely Tesco, Sainsbury and Asda have efficiently
using internet services into their businesses. As per the Mintel Report, total online sales of Tesco
have experienced an increase of more than 37% in August 2016 in comparison to its sales in
2015. On the other hand, Tesco is currently encountering competition from specialist warehouse
operator Ocado, which is partly owned by the John Lewis Partnership that further owns Waitrose
(Reports.mintel.com 2019). Reports of Hobbs (2019) have revealed that successfully delivering
the Waitrose product range, Ocado's successful development has corresponded to the existing
growth of the Waitrose supermarket chain. Moreover, with around 25% of the Internet grocery
sector, Ocado, the warehouse operators has claimed to reduce the sales growth of Sainsbury and
reduced its market position to the third place (Nash and Gell 2018). Cassidy (2017) have noted
that the Internet grocery market has been increasingly flourishing. Such an increased level of
competition has motivated companies like Sainsbury and ASDA to boost the exposure area of
their delivery services and the product range available online.

3MARKETING
E-service quality, e-satisfaction and relationship satisfaction
Service quality and customer satisfaction are identified as fundamental concepts of
marketing research. Likewise, their recreation is recognized as influential goal for businesses.
Crane (2016) has noted that as the association between two parties develop consumers’ expected
service quality and satisfaction. Such an association is increased to an accumulated level which
is fundamental theme in the domain of Nordic school of relationship quality. Kim and Peterson
(2017) in their studies have mentioned that relationship gratification is a summarised assessment.
It further offers and evaluation of the quality of all former interactions with the service provider,
and eventually increases transaction specific satisfaction with the products or services of the
organisation. On the other hand, Crane (2016) has argued that service quality along with
customer satisfaction is recognised as critical of relationship satisfaction. Research related to
relationship quality in an online marketing context are quite inadequate. However, there can be
found no substantial research which has evaluated the relationship between e service qualities
and satisfaction in internet shopping (Singh 2017). As a result, it has been noted that providing
supreme quality customer service and highly satisfied experience increase the satisfaction level
of consumers with the relationship of internet retailers.
Several scholars have studied customer loyalty in the traditional brick and mortar
marketplace. Crane (2016) has conducted a research on e-loyalty and explored the consequences
of loyalty. Consequences of loyalty involve certain issues related to customers inclination of
paying more along with word of mouth promotion. These consequences have also identified 8
important factors related to e-loyalty namely, choice, contact interactivity, community, care,
cultivation, convenience, customisation and character. These factors are likely to affect the
concept of e-loyalty. Furthermore, Cassidy (2017) has mentioned that there is an impact of

4MARKETING
consumer satisfaction on loyalty in the context of electronic commerce. Han et al. (2018) in their
studies claimed that the concept of e satisfaction tends to have an impact on loyalty whereby
such a relationship is moderated by the individual level factors of customers such as convenience
motivation purchase size or inertia. Adams (2015) has indicated that the sustainability of internet
research for e-tailing primary relies on the products’ features as well as services, which are
marketed to the consumers. At this juncture, Adams (2015) has drawn comparison of customer
loyalty in conventional brick and motors or physical stores and internet for e-commerce
purchase. However it has been observed that the service quality as well as customer trust has
increased the level of customer loyalty with online vendors in both the contexts. Drawing
relevance to these factors Jones (2015) has revealed that products with renowned brand value in
the online market environment have been receiving higher level of consumer loyalty in
comparison to the brands which have shown in competence in gaining equivalent level of brand
recognition in the market.
However as per the opinion of Hobbs (2019), instead of emphasizing on individual brand
value it is important to focus on the transfer ability of store loyalty to online or a loyalty in the
internet shopping context. Recently Wakefield et al. (2017) have found that loyal customers are
showing greater interest to adopt brand extensions such as the online version of physical store.
Han et al. (2018) have claimed that approach of customers towards online shopping or e-
commerce have greater degree of flexibility and identified as a continuous process. Thus, the
customers have higher tendency to show intrinsic relationship which is not opportunistic. It is
important to note that service quality along with customer satisfaction have been viewed as two
most vital determinants of loyalty from traditional perspective. These two determinants are
undoubtedly recognised as the two fundamental concepts which are at the core of the marketing

5MARKETING
theory of John Lewis. Nevertheless Crane (2016) has noted that the relationship between these
two constructs has been recognised as an important subject of major debut with several other
scholars. Singh (2017) through studies has assessed the development and progression of loyalty
among consumers through several behaviour as well as attitude in facets of measurement the
correct composites perspective. On the other hand Wakefield et al. (2017) have noted that unlike
store loyalty brand loyalty has primarily shown inclination towards certain product or services.
However in the e-commerce sector the e-store itself tends to contain highly tangible as well as
intangible elements. E-commerce is a likeable place for customers where they can purchase
products by seeing on the website across diverse stages of the service delivery. These services
maybe consequential in certain experience with services as well as products offered.
According to Shafiee and Bazargan (2018) in internet purchase, customer loyalty has
been recognised as a composite blend of their outlook, approach as well as behavioural patterns.
Assessing the extent to which a consumer will show the level of inclination towards the internet
store. These assessments can evaluate the extent to which a customer will show inclination
towards the store and purchase its products on a frequent basis. Meanwhile reports of Akamavi et
al. (2015) have revealed that John Lewis has emphasized on shifting the preconceptions related
to customers’ choice and preferences. It has further emphasize on first consumers to visit their
stores on a more frequent basis. The concept of rewards has been proved to be highly successful
for John Lewis as it has an emotional association with its consumers as it pushes across its
marketing. However Akamavi et al. (2015) have claimed that the rewards concept will not be
effective for all brands and that marketers must put their efforts in order to target consumers and
offers strategies which will align to their marketing tactics. At this point of discussion authors
have indicated that previously John Lewis scheme of offering money has been incompetent to

6MARKETING
associate with its members (Quach, Thaichon and Jebarajakirthy 2016). Shafiee and Bazargan
(2018) have assumed that continual evaluation has been highly crucial while building e-loyalty
through relationship quality. John Lewis has shown such scheme with a small group of
consumers for a year. This pattern has enabled him to gather insights about the recognition and
popularity of, personalized content and events in the minds of contemporary consumers.
Comparative Study of John Lewis and House of Fraser
At this point of discussion, Sutherland (2018) has noted that recently there can be
witnessed a critical competitiveness between two recognized shops competing in the same sector
and products they are offering to their customers. These two shops have been evaluating the roles
and responsibilities of their employees and the most effective bargains, which they can offer
currently. While establishing a comparative study of John Dewis and House of Fraser, Salaman
and Storey (2016) have revealed that both the shops have been strategically offering exceptional
shopping experience to its consumers. They have also been highly proficient in maintaining as
distinct, attractive and well-presented store decor. It has been noted that the employee base of
both the stores of John Lewis and House of Fraser show great assistance. However, it has been
noticed that the number of employees in John Lewis have reportedly outnumbered its competitor.
Meanwhile, Bulut and Karabulut (2018) in their research has mentioned that John Lewis has
been constituting an extensive range of product range specifically in its electrical department.
While on the other hand, House of Fraser has been acquiring attention of its customers with its
extensive range of cosmetics and beauty products. Ramanathan et al. (2017) noted that while a
random price evaluation suggested the sales of cosmetics and beauty products of House of Fraser
have been to some extent valued in comparison to John Lewis.

7MARKETING
Reports of Alnawas and Hemsley-Brown (2018) have noted that House of Fraser apparel
section has been highly recognized and appreciated by substantial level of contemporary
customers. Vize et al. (2016) have claimed that several consumers has developed a certain degree
of confusion due to the range of diverse products House of Fraser has been offering and also by
the number of diverse own brands which have been on its offering in certain areas. Ozuem,
Thomas and Lancaster (2016) have cited an example of a wide range of House of Fraser-owned
brands. These brands have been positioned next to each other irrespective of having diminutive
apparent differentiation in the products’ quality or price. While John Lewis comprises of a
single, own-brand offering which has been only distinguishable while comparing with other
renowned labels. Studies conducted by Hsu et al. (2018) have mentioned that John Lewis store
mainly comprises of a huge and outstanding structure with an extensive range of products, which
are strategically positioned. Such a marketing strategy has been conducted in order to draw
substantial level of attention of its customer range, and increases accessibility for buyers to
navigate their preferred products. John Lewis store has been capable of displaying its exceptional
quality, with the proper messages illuminating the brand strategies and vision of the John Lewis
products. Additionally, the eye-catching structure of the physical store of John Lewis reflects its
level of encouraging and supportive customer service (Ramanathan et al. 2017). Comprehensive
studies of Alnawas and Hemsley-Brown (2018) have shed light on the marketing activities of the
two stores in which both John Lewis and House of Fraser have shown utmost importance to its
service and customer care intended for a certain section of consumers and thus have been
strategically differentiating their offers. For example, John Lewis recently has been offering
extensive warranties as benchmark of its product services. While, the House of Fraser showcases
its brand logos and the homepage of the company highlights a good blend of categories that has

8MARKETING
been incorporated in the sale. According to Bulut and Karabulut (2018), House of Fraser has
strategically used feature-style editorials in order to produce a striking as well as easy-to-
navigate experience for its customer base. On the other hand, by focusing on the tagline of ‘More
of what you love for less’; John Lewis has been able to convey its primary focus on the buyers
rather than only concentrating to uplift its sale growth. John Lewis’ section of ‘Top Offers’
through drawing similarity to one of its rival Debenhams has created a subtle look which include
extra filtering options to direct its consumers to specific categories of its product range (Salaman
and Storey 2016).
Meanwhile, recent report of Hsu et al. (2018) has claimed that over the past two years the
highly recognized institution of the British department has been facing certain level of pressure.
Such market pressure and demands has led the House of Fraser to reduce its physical stores
whereas its rival John Lewis has been experienced triggered profit levels. Reports of Alnawas
and Hemsley-Brown (2018) have noted a recent chaotic disintegration of British Home Store
(BHS) in 2015. It has been identified as an initial phase of such a depressing episode in the UK
retail sector. During, this chaotic disintegration the market value of House of Fraser has
experienced as drastic decline of around £220 million. Such a decline has consequently forced to
reduce half its physical stores (Bulut and Karabulut 2018). Such a pressurizing situation emerged
in BHS because of issue related to unprofessional conduct, negligence, mismanagement, a wide
gap of pension deficit in addition to abandoned store estates. Salaman and Storey (2016) have
mentioned that since then, far from rising successful out of such a deteriorating state in the retail
sector, the primary department store rivals of BHS namely John Lewis and House of Fraser have
shown certain level of incompetence than ever. On the other hand, reports of authors have
claimed that sales growth of the department store of House of Fraser has been severely declining.

9MARKETING
Thus claiming its prospective sales growth will not be effective if it does not close at least 31 of
its 59 shops. The physical stores of House of Fraser mainly include its Oxford Street flagship,
through a company voluntary arrangement (CVA). Such a form of restructuring has aligned with
fashion and organization’s strategies and has been implemented in order to release weakening
stores from its lease obligations. Shafiee and Bazargan (2018) in their study have claimed that
John Lewis in this scenario has not been any different and similarly has been struggling to
rebrand its brand to John Lewis & partners.
With the increasing level of interest consumers are attaining for various brands, it is
highly imperative for the UK retail chains to create as well as uniquely strategize a well-
established identity for themselves. Drawing relevance to these factors, Wakefield et al. (2017)
have noted that recently the John Lewis Partnership has revealed its rebranding strategies. These
strategies have been chiefly intended to emphasize on one of its key differentiators that is its
partner-owned position. However, although John Lewis has been aware of its brand positioning
in the UK market, House of Fraser and has been encountering high demands and consequently
struggling for offering a highly diverse range of products rather than focusing on a single product
range. Thus, as per the view of Quach, Thaichon and Jebarajakirthy (2016), such a lack of
distinctiveness in the market has left the firm to be susceptible to ranging market demands and
also to the increasing direct-to-consumer brand strategies. Marketing activities of the two stores
in which both John Lewis and House of Fraser have shown utmost importance to its service and
customer care. Their aims is to focus on a certain section of consumers and thus have been
strategically differentiating their offers. Thus, House of Frasers must not indulge itself in
creating a situation of uncertainty and misunderstanding for its clientele and also avoid any form

10MARKETING
of marketing strategies such as trialling gyms in-store which fail to align to the needs of its
consumers.
Conclusion
Therefore, from the above discussion it can be concluded that John Lewis has been
strategically expanding its ecommerce idea and thus has been offering its customer base with
more digital personalisation. However, John Lewis has claimed that the strategy of digital
personalization will not be effective of the brand does not suggest exceptional human
experiences. Thus, it is important for companies to adapt technology as well as digitalization
along with human interactions in order to connect its customers with its strategies and aims. As a
result, human interactions are recognized as the primary as well as core driver of loyalty and it is
at this area where number of brands has been focusing on in order to sustain its competitive
advantages in the sector. Moreover, retail brands like House of Fraser and John Lewis do not
offer its consumers with user category specific search, which is identified as a facility that
Amazon has been offering as their core principle along with a highly effective process of
navigating its extensive product range.

11MARKETING
References
Adams, S., 2015. Towards an Ethical PR? An Exploration into Student’s Ethical Perceptions
towards the Sainsbury’s WWI Campaign. International Journal of Ethics, 11(3).
Akamavi, R.K., Mohamed, E., Pellmann, K. and Xu, Y., 2015. Key determinants of passenger
loyalty in the low-cost airline business. Tourism management, 46, pp.528-545.
Alnawas, I. and Hemsley-Brown, J., 2018. The differential effect of cognitive and emotional
elements of experience quality on the customer-service provider’s relationship. International
Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 46(2), pp.125-147.
Bulut, Z.A. and Karabulut, A.N., 2018. Examining the role of two aspects of eWOM in online
repurchase intention: An integrated trust–loyalty perspective. Journal of Consumer
Behaviour, 17(4), pp.407-417.
Cassidy, T.D., 2017. Exploring the Garment Fit paradigm from a Sustainability Perspective and
its Meaning for FirstCycle and Second-Cycle Fashion Retailers. Current Trends in Fashion
Technology & Textile Engineering, 1(3).
Crane, D., 2016. The puzzle of the ethical fashion consumer: Implications for the future of the
fashion system. International Journal of Fashion Studies, 3(2), pp.249-265.
Han, H., Nguyen, H.N., Song, H., Chua, B.L., Lee, S. and Kim, W., 2018. Drivers of brand
loyalty in the chain coffee shop industry. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 72,
pp.86-97.

12MARKETING
Hobbs, T., 2019. John Lewis: Human interactions are still the primary driver of loyalty. [online]
Marketing Week. Available at: https://www.marketingweek.com/2017/10/06/john-lewis-human-
interactions-still-primary-driver-loyalty/ [Accessed 23 Apr. 2019].
Hsu, C.L., Chen, M.C. and Kumar, V., 2018. How social shopping retains customers? Capturing
the essence of website quality and relationship quality. Total quality management & business
excellence, 29(1-2), pp.161-184.
Jones, P., 2015. Materiality in corporate sustainability reporting: A research note on the UK’s
leading food retailers. Journal of Management Cases, p.42.
Kim, Y. and Peterson, R.A., 2017. A Meta-analysis of Online Trust Relationships in E-
commerce. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 38, pp.44-54.
Nash, J. and Gell, E., 2018. Exploring social media influences on colour cosmetics purchase
decisions for females aged 45+. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, 12(1),
pp.1-31.
Ozuem, W., Thomas, T. and Lancaster, G., 2016. The influence of customer loyalty on small
island economies: an empirical and exploratory study. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 24(6),
pp.447-469.
Quach, T.N., Thaichon, P. and Jebarajakirthy, C., 2016. Internet service providers' service
quality and its effect on customer loyalty of different usage patterns. Journal of Retailing and
Consumer Services, 29, pp.104-113.

13MARKETING
Ramanathan, U., Subramanian, N., Yu, W. and Vijaygopal, R., 2017. Impact of customer loyalty
and service operations on customer behaviour and firm performance: empirical evidence from
UK retail sector. Production Planning & Control, 28(6-8), pp.478-488.
Reports.mintel.com., 2019. Mintel Reports: Consumer market analysis | Mintel.com. [online]
Reports.mintel.com. Available at: http://reports.mintel.com/homepages/guest/ [Accessed 23 Apr.
2019].
Saghiri, S., Wilding, R., Mena, C. and Bourlakis, M., 2017. Toward a three-dimensional
framework for omni-channel. Journal of Business Research, 77, pp.53-67.
Salaman, G. and Storey, J., 2016. A Better Way of Doing Business?: Lessons from the John
Lewis Partnership. Oxford University Press.
Shafiee, M.M. and Bazargan, N.A., 2018. Behavioral customer loyalty in online shopping: the
role of e-service quality and e-recovery. Journal of theoretical and applied electronic commerce
research, 13(1), pp.26-38.
Singh, S., 2017. Examining Factors Influencing Customer Loyalty and Repurchase Intentions in
Online Shopping: An Indian Perspective. Indira Management Review, 11(2), pp.76-87.
Sutherland, E., 2018. John Lewis vs House of Fraser: The battle of the own brands. Retrieved
from https://www.drapersonline.com/news/comment/john-lewis-vs-house-of-fraser-the-battle-
of-the-own-brands/7028648.article [Accessed 23 Apr. 2019]
Vize, R., Coughlan, J., Keneedy, A. and Ellis-Chadwick, F., 2016. Measuring B2B relationship
quality in an online context: Exploring the roles of service quality, power, and loyalty.

14MARKETING
In Celebrating America’s Pastimes: Baseball, Hot Dogs, Apple Pie and Marketing? (pp. 255-
267). Springer, Cham.
Wakefield, B.J., Turvey, C.L., Nazi, K.M., Holman, J.E., Hogan, T.P., Shimada, S.L. and
Kennedy, D.R., 2017. Psychometric properties of patient-facing eHealth evaluation measures:
systematic review and analysis. Journal of medical Internet research, 19(10), p.e346.
Watson, G.F., Beck, J.T., Henderson, C.M. and Palmatier, R.W., 2015. Building, measuring, and
profiting from customer loyalty. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(6), pp.790-
825.