5.4. Internal factors on the export performance of SMEs
5.4.3. Customer value
111
disagreed with the statement, which implies that the majority of SMEs do not employ experienced people who have relevant distinctive competencies to do the work.
Furthermore, distinctive capabilities also revolve around having unique and adequate marketing resources that enables a firm to undertake creative marketing to entice customers and as such SMEs owner-managers were asked to determine this ability. Table 5.11 captures the responses that were highlighted.
Table 5.11: Marketing resources to successfully undertake exporting activities
Source: Compiled from Primary Data
Table 5.11 reflects the response to the statement “We have marketing resources to successfully undertake exporting activities.” The majority of the participants strongly disagreed with the statement representing (46.4%) of the respondents. The results indicate that the majority of the participants do not have marketing resources to successfully undertake marketing activities and as such, the ability to influence customers towards liking their products is subdued and this is seen as contributing to the export performance of SMEs.
112
Figure 5.14: Exports that meet value expectation of target customers
Source: Compiled from Primary Data
Figure 5.14 illustrates the response to the statement “We export products that effectively meet value expectations of our target customers.” It became clear that the majority (58.4%) of the participants „strongly disagreed‟ with the statement, which demonstrates that large proportions of the products manufactured by SMEs are far below the expectations of the target customers.
The literature highlighted that the „desired‟ and „perceived‟ values are subsets of customer value and are very crucial in determining the export performance of a firm. In light of this, the SME owner-managers were asked to provide information on whether their products have customer value components and their responses are reflected in Figure 5.15.
Figure 5.15: Exports encompassing desired and perceived value
Source: Compiled from Primary Data
113
Figure 5.15 illustrates the response to the statement “Our exports encompass the desired and perceived value of our customers.” It is evident that the majority of the participants
„disagreed‟ with the statement, highlighting that the perceived value of the products are not the same as the product functionality (desired value), thereby creating dissatisfaction.
It has also been noted that customer value also entails producing a products with instrumental value and as such managers of SMEs were asked whether their products being exported had instrumental value and Table 5.12 illustrates their responses.
Table 5.12: Exports with instrumental value
Source: Compiled from Primary Data
Table 5.12 illustrates the response to the statement “We export products with attributes or contents that fulfil the desired needs of our customers (instrumental value).” The results indicate that the majority (43.7%) of the participants „strongly disagreed‟ with the statement.
The SME owner-managers were also asked about the ability of their exports to create a long lasting impression (experiential value) in the minds of target customers as this is perceived as one way of generating consumer interests and brand ambassadors. Figure 5.16 depicts the responses generated from the SMEs owner-managers.
Frequency Percent
Strongly disagree 145 43.7
Disagree 102 30.7
Neutral 17 5.1
Agree 48 14.5
Strongly agree 20 6.0
Total 332 100.0
114 Figure 5.16: Exports with experiential value
Source: Compiled from Primary Data
Figure 5.16 illustrates the response to the statement “We export products that create long lasting impressions (experiential value).” It is evident that the majority (44.6%) of the participants „strongly disagreed‟ with the statement.
Furthermore, customer value also revolves around producing a product that enables a customer to attach psychological meaning to the product and this is perceived as one way of making the customers remember the product and consequently generating interest which will then lead to making a purchase. In this regard, SMEs owner-managers were asked to determine if their products have symbolic/ psychological meaning, and the reponses are depicted in Figure 5.17.
115
Figure 5.17: Attachment of psychological meaning to the product
Source: Compiled from Primary Data
Figure 5.17 illustrates the aggregate response to the statement “We export products that enable our customers to attach a psychological meaning to the product (symbolic value or expressive value).” It is eviden from Figure 5.27, that the majority (54.8%) of the participants „strongly disagreed‟ with the statement.
Furthermore, customers attach value to a product before engaging in the final purchase of the product and therefore for a business to win the customer, the value offered by the product has to be commensurate with the value offered by the customer. In order to ascertain information on the aforementioned, the participants were asked to indicate the value of the products they exported. The responses are captured in Table 5.13.
116 Table 5.13: Exports with the cost or sacrifice value
Source: Compiled from Primary Data
Table 5.13 reflects the response to the statement “We export products with the value commensurate with the value offered by our customers (cost or sacrifice value). The majority (52.1%) of the participants „strongly disagreed‟ with the statement.
In order to produce a product commensurate with the value offered by the customer, there is no option except to invite customer inputs before the product is manufactured. To determine the aforementioned with respect to the study sample, participants were requested to respond to the following statement: “We invite customer inputs when we manufacture products for exports (co-creation value),” and Figure 5.18 highlights their responses.
Figure 5.18: Exports with co-creation value
Source: Compiled from Primary Data
Frequency Percent
Strongly disagree 173 52.1
Disagree 76 22.9
Neutral 16 4.8
Agree 46 13.9
Strongly agree 21 6.3
Total 332 100.0
117
It is evident from Figure 5.18 that the majority of participants „strongly disagreed‟ with the statement.