The paper “ Sizzler Restaurants - Russel’ s Model of Affect, the Boundary Spanning Employees, a Blueprint for the Service Process, Different Types of Jay Customers " is a good variant of a case study on marketing. The author uses the servicescape model and Russel’ s Model of Affect to explain Zoe’ s and Carol’ s responses to their Sizzler service encounter experience. Servicescape modelDescribed by Bitner in 1992, Servicescape aims at describing an organization’ s overall appearance by analyzing the physical characteristics or features within the establishment. The various dimensions in relation to Sizzler are as discussed below: Perceived quality: The perceived quality of service within an establishment is bound to promote excitement and satisfaction.
In this case, Zoe did not find the quality at Sizzler particularly good. This was as a result of the dirty tables and the long queues that they had to undergo. On the other hand, Carol tagged the quality on the supposedly good food that was being sold for so little. While Zoe may not have been satisfied, Carol seemed comfortable with the restaurant. Perceived crowding: This feature reduces perceived quality and excitement.
In Zoe’ s view, the crowded restaurant was not appealing and she found it rather uncomfortable. Carol was used to this kind of setting and therefore the crowding at the hotel did not affect her perception of the hotel. While she seemed excited, Zoe would have been more comfortable in other restaurants where there were no queues and where it was less crowded. Repatronage intentions: Once a customer is satisfied, he is likely to come again for the same service. Carol definitely had patronage intentions. For her, the experience was satisfying and she wished to repeat the same again.
Zoe did not wish to go through the same ordeal. Her satisfaction level was low and patronage intentions were therefore inexistent. Enduring involvement: This factor increases excitement and enhances future patronage intentions. Carol’ s interest in the hotel played a significant role in how she viewed the hotel such that she was highly excited and wanted to come back. For Zoe, there was no interest in the hotel and she could have changed the venue if she had the opportunity. Excitement: Excitement is triggered by the perceived quality and enduring involvement.
The experience was not exciting for Zoe who had just come from China and was used to less crowded places. Queuing was not exciting for her and she did not like the way the hotel was maintained. Carol was however very excited due to the discounts and large quantities of food available at the restaurant. The quality of the hotel did not matter so much. Satisfaction: Satisfaction is jointly dependent on a combination of perceived quality, excitement and enduring involvement. Zoe’ s experiences and observations definitely did not amount to satisfaction.
She did not like the quality of the restaurant and thus did not feel considerable excitement to make her come back. For Carol, the whole experience was very exciting; given that she could take all the food and drinks that she could manage for a small fee. The quality of service did not matter so much and she was willing to queue for a long period of time to get to the restaurant.