turn off anonymous marking

This is a preview of the print version of your report. Please click "print" to continue or "done" to close this window.

THE IMPLEMENTATION OF INVESTMENT MODEL TO INCREASE HOTEL’S CUSTOMERS COMMITMENT IN JAKARTA Keni1), Ary Satria Pamungkas2) Tarumanagara University, Jakarta, Indonesia 1)keni@fe.untar.ac.id Abstract Hospitality industry in Indonesia offers huge opportunities. The occupancy rate continues to increase due to the increase in both domestic and foreign tourists. One of the critical factors for hotels to remain competitive is to retain existing customers. However, customer retention requires significant amount of efforts and resources as the market becomes more prominent. As customer retention becomes an important success factor, industry players need to have deep understanding of the drivers that influence customer retention/ commitment.The investment model is proposed to determine the factors that affect the level of customers’commitment. This model consists of three variables - satisfaction, quality of alternative and the investment size. This study examines the three variables in the investment model and their relation to increase customer commitment. This is a descriptive research that using a questionnaire to collect the data. The data analysis technique is a multiple regression analysis. The results evidenced that satisfaction and investment size positively affect customer’s commitment, while the quality of alternative does not affect customer’s commitment. Hence, the implementation of investment model to improve customer commitment can be implemented by increasing the satisfaction and the investment size. Keywords: Investment Model, Customer Commitment, Hospitality, Jakarta, Indonesia Introduction Tourism has an important role for economic development of a region. The existence of hotel gives the opportunity to the local residents to get a job and an income. “The Travel & Tourism Economic Impact Indonesia 2015" issued by the World Travel & Tourism Council revealed that in 2014, the field of tourism in Indonesia created 3,326,000 jobs employment (2.9% of total employment). This number is expected to grow by 2.3% in 2015 and will grow by 1.4% per year over the next ten years. In 2025, the tourism sector is expected to produce 3,905,000 jobs employment. In addition, hotel increases the value of land and encourages businesses of hotels’ surrounding. Hospitality also contributes to the development of tourism in the local area. Tourist area in a region will be progressed and visited by many tourists that are supported by a hotel lodging accommodations that is good and adequate. The hospitality industry in Indonesia has huge potential and will always be alive because of the natural resources of tourism in Indonesia are so numerous and interesting as well as its diversity and cultural uniqueness. The occupancy rate of hotels in various major cities in Indonesia is never low. The hotel occupancy rate in Indonesia has increased due to an increasing number of foreign and local tourists visit. The increasing number of tourists will certainly increase the occupancy rate of the hotel that invites more hotel business players. This result will raisethe competition among hotels. To be ready for competition, the management of a hotel needs to think about what efforts should be made so that tourists remained back to stay in the same hotel. In other words, what a hotel management should do to create loyal customers? Basically, hotel management needs to build strong relationships with its customers to keep customers’ satisfaction. Given the importance of customer commitment for a company, especially the hospitality, the knowledge and understanding are factors that affect customer commitment is needed. Some previous studies in the field of marketing show that there are many factors that can explain the customer commitment. However, few studies that implement the investment model to explain customer commitment to a company. Investment model had originally developed by Rusbult in psychological literature to examine the relationship between individuals (Rusbult, 1980a, 1980b, 1983; Rusbult et al., 1986). According to the investment model, commitment between individuals can be explained by three factors, among others: first, satisfaction with the relationship, meaning that the higher the level of satisfaction with the relationship, the commitment will be stronger; second, quality of alternative, referring to the perceived relationship quality comparison. This means that the individual has a high level of commitment if the alternative perceived quality worse; Third, the investment size, refers to the individual investment in a relationship, which means that if an individual has invested time and resources in a relationship, the commitment to the individual will be higher (Rusbult, 1980a; Rusbult et al., 1986; Rusbult et al., 1998). Further study showed that the investment model is not only implemented in relationship between individuals, but also the relationship between the company and its customers (Ping, 2007; Sung & Campbell, 2009; Bugel et al., 2010; Sung & Choi, 2010; Boakye et al., 2012). Research Bugel et al. (2010) implement the investment model for the banking sector, health insurance, supermarkets, telecommunications and automotive. Results of research Bugel et al. (2010) showed that the investment model can be implemented to these five sectors, with the largest contribution in explaining customer commitment is in the banking sector and the smallest is the automotive sector and supermarket. However, to the best of our knowledge, there is no research hastested the implementation of the investment model to customer commitment in the hospitality sector. Therefore, this study examines the applicability of the investment model to customer commitment of hotels in Jakarta, Indonesia. Theoretical Background Customer Commitment Customer commitment is a major factor in the relationship marketing (Fullerton, 2003; Morgan & Hunt, 1994). According to Morgan and Hunt (1994: 23) explains that the commitment is “an exchange partner believing that an ongoing relationship with another is so important as to warrant maximum efforts at maintaining it.” Align with that definition, Moorman, Zaltman and Deshpande (1992: 316) reveal the commitment as “enduring desire to maintain a valued relationship.” In the marketing research, some researchers regard commitments as uni-dimensional concept (Morgan & Hunt, 1994; Prithcard et al., 1999), while other researchers regard commitment as a multi-dimensional concept (Bansal, Irving & Taylor, 2004). Meyer and Allen initially proposed commitments differentiated into affective commitment and continuance commitment. Affective commitment shows emotional, identification and involvement of employees in an organization, whereas continuance commitment refers to the employee's perception of the cost to be borne if leaving the organization (Meyer & Allen, 1984). Furthermore, Allen and Meyer suggest a third commitment, namely the normative commitment which refers to the feelings of employees of the obligations that must be given to the organization (Allen & Meyer, 1990). Investment Model Investment model originally was developed by Rusbult in the psychology literature with the aim to examine the relationship between individuals (Rusbult, 1980a, 1980b, 1983; Rusbult et al., 1986). This model was built based on several principles contained in interdependence theory (theory of dependency) and assume that the individual in general are encouraged to maximize results and minimize costs (Kelley & Thibaut, 1978 in Rusbult, 1980a). There are two main factors in the theory of dependency (Rusbult et al., 1998). First, the dependence of an individual will increase if the increase satisfaction in the relations between individuals. Second, the dependence of an individual is not only influenced by the level of satisfaction, but is influenced by the quality of one of the alternatives available. Quality of alternative refers to the desire of the best alternative available. It is based on the extent to which the most important needs of an individual can be effectively fulfilled from existing relationships. Investment models, further expanding the theory of dependency and reveal a commitment among individuals affected not only by the satisfaction, quality of alternative available today, but also by the investment size (Rusbult, 1980a; Rusbult et al., 1998). Further study showed that the investment model is not only implemented in relations between individuals, but also in the relationship between the company and its customers (Ping, 2007; Sung & Campbell, 2009; Bugel et al., 2010; Sung & Choi, 2010; Boakye et al., 2012). For example, research conducted by Bugel et al. (2010) implement the investment model for the banking sector, health insurance, supermarkets, telecommunications and automotive. Results of research Bugel et al. (2010) showed that the investment model can be implemented to these five sectors, with the largest contribution in explaining customer commitment is in the banking sector and the smallest is the automotive sector and supermarket. Satisfaction According to Kotler and Keller (2016: 153), “satisfaction is a person's feelings of pleasure or disappointment the resulting from comparing a product's perceived performance (or outcome) in relation to his or her expectations.” Further Kotler and Keller (2016) explain a customer will be very satisfied or satisfied if the perceived performance exceeds or in accordance with customer expectations and vice versa. Oliver (1997) explained that the satisfaction of an assessment of the features of the product or service, or a product or service itself, which can provide the level of fulfillment of customers’ wants. The customer is satisfied when products or services meet their needs and desires. In general, there are two approaches to conceptualize satisfaction, that is the cumulative approach and the approach of the transaction (Boulding, 1993). In the cumulative approach, customer satisfaction can be defined as the overall evaluation of a customer after consuming a product or service, while the transaction approaches explain that customer satisfaction as a function of expectation before consuming a product or service and the perceived performance after consuming the product or service. In this study, customer satisfaction is defined using the cumulative approach, where satisfaction is a total evaluation of a customer on the quality of services provided by the hotel. Top quality hospitality services using the seven dimensions of scale SERQUAL, developed by Lai and Hitchcock (2016), among others: tangibles, reliability, assurance, empathy, environment, technology and entertainment. Quality of Alternatives Rusbult and Buunk (1993: 182) explained that “the quality of alternatives refers to an individual's judgment of the attractiveness of available alternatives - another relationship, dating around or the option of non-involvement.” Meanwhile, according to Impett et al. (2001: 313), “alternatives refer to an individual's subjective assessment of the rewards and costs that could be obtained outside the current relationship, including specific other partners, spending time with friends and family, or spending time alone.” In relationships between customers and brands, Sung and Choi (2010: 1056), “the quality of alternatives refers to a consumer's judgment or evaluation of the attractiveness of available alternative brand choices or option, for example: number of competing brands or quality of competing brands.” Based on the above definition, quality of alternative to be a consumer assessment or evaluation of the appeal of the selection of alternatives brands available. For example a number of competing brands or the quality of the competing brands. Investment Size In relation to interpersonal relationships, investment size includes resources such as time effort and money spent on establishing relationships between individuals (Rusbult & Buunk, 1993). While in relation in the field of marketing, investment size related to the concept of switching cost and termination cost (Boakye et al., 2012; Bugel et al., 2010; Sung & Choi, 2010), which refers to the technical factors, financial and psychological make the customer is difficult and expensive to move to another brand (Beerli et al., 2004). Investing in the relationship between companies and customers will increase the switching cost, so the impact is difficult for customers to switch to another company. Thus, investing in customer relationships becomes significant in terms of customer commitment (Bugel et al., 2010). According to Sung and Choi (2010), there are two perspectives in explaining investment size. First, from the perspective in which the customers are showing their loyalty to the company because the company has invested resources in a relationship with the customer. In contrast, the second perspective, the customer shows his loyalty to the company caused by the customers themselves who have invested resources in a relationship with the company. In the study, investment size refers to the perspective or viewpoint of the customer, which means that the customer has invested time, money and effort (resources) to establish relationships with the company (hotel). Effect of the investment model on customer commitment There are several studies that describe relationships between three variables in the investment model and customer commitment. Bugel et al. (2010) explain the relationship between investment model and customers commitment on five sectors and the results showed that the banking sector has the highest application rate in the investment model and tend to be low in supermarkets and automotive sectors. Three variables used in this model to predict customer commitment is satisfaction, quality of alternative and investment size. Results from this study is the satisfaction is the main factor that affect customer commitment in the service sector. Furthermore, Rusbult and Buunk (1993) concluded that high commitment can be achieved if customers feel that they are satisfied with the relationship involving appreciation and without incur huge costs. It is explain that when a person is satisfied with the relationship, then that person will be more committed tothe relationship. Sung and Campbell (2009) and Sung and Choi (2010) emphasized that higher satisfaction will drive customer towards better commitment, where this is in line with research conducted by Liang et al. (2009), which suggests that customer satisfaction should be the key to improving relations and a major factor to gain customer commitment to the brand. Customer commitment is based on the customer's desire to get a good relationship (Morgan & Hunt, 1994). Chen (2012) and Garbiano and Johnson (1999) identified that customer commitment is positively influenced by customer satisfaction.Therefore, the first hypothesis which can be developed as follow: H1: Satisfactionhas a positive effect to commitment Quality of alternatives is perceived as another substantial factor to predict commitment in the investment model. Stronger commitment exists if the number of alternatives are lower or not attractive. On the other hand, if high quality alternatives are there, commitment would be weaker (Rusbult, 1980a). Impett et al. (2001) defined the quality of alternative as individual force that pulls someone from a relationship. When this factor is weak, people become more committed. Inline with this, Sung and Campbell (2009) and Sung and Choi (2010) also mentioned that higher customer commitment would be achieved if the quality of alternative is weak, while Bugel et al.(2010) found out that alternative is the highest in supermarket and automotive sectors and the lowest in the banking industry. Thus, the second hypothesis can be developed as follow: H2: Quality of alternativeshas a negative effect to commitment Bugel et al. (2010), from previous studies found that there is a positive correlation between the investment size in the relationship with the customer commitment. The investment size has the highest correlation with the commitments in the banking and automotive sectors, while the telecommunications sector has the lowest correlation. Furthermore, the higher investment size will move in a better commitment to the brand (Sung & Campbell, 2009; Sung & Choi, 2010). Hence, we posit the following hypothesis: H3: Investment sizehas a positive effect to commitment Methods This research tried to explain the linkages of variablesin the investment model to commitment. Therefore, the design of the research is descriptive research design. The approach used in the descriptive research is cross- sectional.Methods of sample selection used in this research is a non-probability sampling method. Sample selection techniques used is the technique of convenience with the number of samples obtained as many as 249 customers. The questionnaire is developed based on the literature study.They are 14 items to measure all variables, which are adapted from previous study (see Table I). Multiple regression analysis is used to test the hypotheses. Table I. Measurement Variable Measurement Source I was fully satisfied with the services offered by this hotel. Lai & Satisfaction The services offered by this hotel met my expectations. Hitchcock I am satisfied with my experience in this hotel. (2016) Other hotel has more modern looking equipment. Alternatives Employees of other hotel provide more prompt service. Zeithaml & Quality of Other hotel provides more reliable services. Parasuraman, Employees of other hotel are consistently courteous with me. Berry (1991) Employees of other hotel understand my specific needs. Investment Size I have invested a great deal of money in this hotel. Agnew I have invested a great deal of time in the relationship with this hotel. Rusbult, Martz &All things considered, I have put a lot into the relationship with this hotel. (1998) Commitment I enjoy discussing about this hotel with people outside it. Meyer (1990) I would be very happy to remain as a customer of this hotel. Allen & This hotel has a great deal of personal meaning to me. Results and Discussions Goodness of measures Factor analysis is used to measure the fitness of data. Validity test is done to determine how well an instrument developed can measure a particular concept that is intended to measure. As shown in Table II, the factor loadings of each of the items are within the acceptable range. The factor loadings all of the items are above 0.70.Meanwhile, the reliability test is conducted by calculatingCronbach’s Alpha. According to Hair et al. (2010)Cronbach’s Alpha of 0.7 or higher is a good rule of thumb for reliability. All constructs in thisstudy have met the requirements for validity and reliability test. Table II. Validity and reliability test results Variable Measurement Factor loadings Cronbach’ s Alpha I was fully satisfied with the services offered by this hotel. 0.919 0.912 Satisfaction The services offered by this hotel met my expectations. 0.934 I am satisfied with my experience in this hotel. 0.914 Other hotel has more modern looking equipment. 0.765 0.913 Alternatives Employees of other hotel provide more prompt service. 0.899 Quality of Other hotel provides more reliable services. 0.914 Employees of other hotel are consistently courteous with me. 0.863 Employees of other hotel understand my specific needs. 0.877 Investment I have invested a great deal of time in the relationship with this 0.825 0.781 hotel. Size I have invested a great deal of money in this hotel. 0.795 All things considered, I have put a lot into the relationship with this hotel. 0.883 I would be very happy to remain as a customer of this hotel. 0.771 0.753 Commitment I enjoy discussing about this hotel with people outside it. 0.882 This hotel has a great deal of personal meaning to me. 0.814 Hypotheses testing results Table III shows relationship, t-value, each path variable coefficient and significancy of this model. Table III. Results of hypotheses testing Hypothesis Relationships Estimate t-value H1 Satisfaction ? commitment 0.273 4.912** H2 Quality of alternatives ? commitment -0.023 -0.424 H3 Investment size ? commitment 0.411 7.359** *?<0.05; **?<0.01; The findings support H1, which satisfaction has a positive effect customer commitment (coefficient = 0.273; t=4.912; ?<0.01). Greater satisfaction means higher commitment. The result of the study consistence to the prior studies (Rusbult & Buunk, 1993; Garbarino & Johnson, 1999; Sung & Campbell, 2009; Bugelet al., 2010; Sung & Choi, 2010; Chen, 2012). It is concluded that commitment is significantly influenced by service satisfaction. Customer commitment is positively associated with customer satisfaction based on the studies conducted by Sung and Campbell (2009). Sung and Choi (2010) found out that the greater satisfaction of individuals, the higher their commitment to the brand. Similarly, if personal relationship with one’s partner is positive and enjoyable, the satisfaction with the relationship will be higher(Rusbult & Buunk, 1993). A study conducted by Bugel et al. (2010) showed that satisfaction is an important factor that will lead to customer commitment in the service sector. Finally, Chen (2012) and Garbarino and Johnson (1999) found that customer commitment is positively influenced by customer satisfaction. Results of this study and supported by prior studies. This study concludes that satisfaction has a positive effect on customer commitment, specifically in thehospitality industry. H2 states that quality of alternatives has a negative effect to commitment; the result do not support this hypothesis (coefficient = -0.023; t=-0.424; ?>0.05). Although the direction is as expected, greater quality of alternatives does not lead to lower commitment. The previous studies do not evidence in this study. H3 states that investment size has a positive effect to commitment; the result support this hypothesis (coefficient = 0.411; t=7.359; ?<0.01).The result of this study is in line with prior studies. Higher commitment is more likely to be achieved if an individual has put a great deal of investment in the current relationship (Rusbult, 1980a; Rusbult & Buunk, 1993; Sung & Campbell, 2009; Bugel et al., 2010 and Sung & Choi, 2010). In the study conducted by Le and Agnew (2003), it can be observed that there is a significant correlation between investment size and commitment in their interpersonal relationship. In summary, investment size has a significant impact and is positively correlated to the customer commitment. It is also supported by results from the study and findings from past researches. Conclusion After analysis and discussions, the conclusions are as follows: 1) Indicators to measure all the variables in the investment model are already qualified in both the validity and the reliability analysis, 2) Results of hypothesis testing showed satisfaction and investment size positively affect customer commitment, while the quality of alternative does not affect customer commitment, 3) Implementation of investment models to increase customer’s commitment can be made by increasing the satisfaction and investment size. The results from this research suggest customer satisfaction should be the main focus in long-term relationships of hotel customers. It will increase the effectiveness of hotel marketing program. To improve satisfaction, hotel management should strive to provide good services. The investment size plays a significant role in improving customer commitment and research describes that among the three variables of the investment model, the investment size is the most powerful predictor to predict customer commitment. To increase the investment size, management create a loyalty program where customers can earn points for every stay at a five-star hotel and from points earned; customers can trade them for shopping vouchers or other attractive prizes. This loyalty program is expected to increase both of customer commitment and increase customer loyalty. References Allen, N. J., & Meyer, J. P. (1990). The measurement and antecedents of affective, continuance and normative commitment to the organization. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 63, 1-18. Anderson, James C.,& Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: a review and recommended two-step approach.Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), 411-23. Bansal, H. S., Irving, P. G., & Taylor, S. F. (2004). A three-commitment model of customer commitment to service providers. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 32(3), 2234-2250. Beerli, A., Martín, J. D., & Quintana, A. (2004). A model of customer loyalty in the retail banking market. European Journal of Marketing, 38(1), 253-275. Boulding, William, Kalra, Ajay, Staelin, R., & Zeithaml, V.A. (1993). A dynamic process model of service quality: from expectation to behavioral intentions. Journal of Marketing Research, XXX(February 1993), 7-27. Boakye, K. G., Kwon, J., Blankson, C., & Prybutok, V. R. (2012). The attraction of the sizzle: a service Investment Model. The Quality Management Journal, 19(4), 24-38. Bügel, M. S., Buunk, A. P., & Verhoef, P. C. (2010). A comparison of customer commitment in five sector using the psychological Investment Model. Journal of Relationship Marketing, 9, 2-29. Chen, S.-C. (2012). The customer satisfaction-loyalty relation in an interactive e-service setting: the Mediator. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Service, 19, 202-210. Fullerton, G. (2003). When does commitment lead to loyalty? Journal of Service Research, 5(4), 333-344. Garbarino, E., & Johnson, M. S. (1999). The different roles of satisfaction, trust, and commitment in customer relationships. Journal of Marketing, 63(April), 70-87. Hair, J., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). Upper saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Education International. Impett, E. A., Beals, K. P., & Peplau, L. A. (2001). Testing the Investment Model of relationship commitment and stability in a longitudinal study of married couples. Current psychology: Development, Learning, Personality, Social, 20(4), 312-326. Kotler, Philip, &Keller, Kevin Lane. (2016). Marketing management (15thed).England: Pearson Education Ltd. Lai, I. K. W., & Hitchcock, M. (2016). A comparison of service quality attributes for stand-alone and resort-based luxury hotels in Macau: 3-dimensional importance performance analysis. Touristm Management, 55, 139-159. Le, B., & Agnew, C. R. (2003). Commitment and its theorized determinants: a meta-analysis of the Investment Model. Personal relationships, 10, 37-57. Liang, C.-J., Wang, W.H., & Farquhar, J. D. (2009). The influence of customer perceptions on financial performance in financial service. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 27(2), 129-149. Meyer, J. P., & Allen, N. J. (1984). Testing the "side-set theory" of organizational commitment: some methodological considerations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69(3), 372-3788. Moorman, C., Zaltman, G., & Deshpande, R. (1992). Relationships between providers and users of market research: the dynamic of trust within and between organizations. Journal of Marketing Research, XXIX(August), 314-328. Morgan, R. M., & Hunt, S. D. (1994). The commitment-trust theory of relationship marketing. Journal of Marketing, 58(3), 20-38. Oliver, R. L. (1997). Satisfaction. A behavioral perspective on the consumer. New York: McGraw-Hill Inc. Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1991). Refinement and reassessment of the SERVQUAL scale. Journal of Retailing, 67(4), 420-450. Ping, R. A. (2007). Salesperson-employer relationships: salesperson responses to relationship problems and their antecedents. Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 27(1), 39-57. Pritchard, M. P., Havitz, M. E., & Howard, D. R. (1999). Analyzing the commitment-loyalty link in service contexts. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 27(3), 333-348. Rusbult, C. E. (1980a). Commitment and satisfaction in romantic associations: A test of the Investment Model. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 16, 172-186. Rusbult, C. E. (1980b). Satisfaction and commitment in friendships. Representative Research in Social Psychology, 11(2), 96-105. Rusbult, C. E. (1983). A longitudinal test of the Investment Model: the development (and deterioration) of satisfaction and commitment in heterosexual involvements. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45(1), 101-117. Rusbult, C. E., Johnson, D. J., & Morrow, G. D. (1986). Predicting satisfaction and commitment in adult romantic involvements: an assessment of the generalizability of the Investment Model. Social Psychology Quarterly, 49(1), 81-89. Rusbult, C. E. (1988). Commitment and satisfaction in romantic associations: a test of the Investment Model. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 16, 172-186. Rusbult, C. E., & Buunk, B. P. (1993). Commitment processes in close relationships: an interdependence analysis. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 10, 175-204. Rusbult, C. E., Martz, J. M., & Agnew, C. R. (1998). The investment mode scale: measuring commitment level, satisfaction level, quality of alternatives, and investment size. Personal relationships, 5, 357-391. Sung, Y., & Campbell, W. K. (2009). Brand commitment in consumer-brand relationships: an Investment Model approach. Journal of Brand Management, 17(2), 97-113. Sung, Y., & Choi, S. M. (2010). "I won't leave you although you disappoint me": the interplay between satisfaction, investment, and alternatives in determining consumer-brand relationship commitment. Psychology & Marketing, 27(11), 1050-1074. World Travel & Tourism Council. (2015). Travel & Tourism Economic Impact 2015 Indonesia. London: World Travel & Tourism Council. The Fifth International Conference on Entrepreneurship and Business Management (ICEBM 2016) Tainan, Taiwan – November 17-18, 2016 ISBN : 978-979-9234-59-9 The Fifth International Conference on Entrepreneurship and Business Management (ICEBM 2016) Tainan, Taiwan – November 17-18, 2016 ISBN : 978-979-9234-59-9 The Fifth International Conference on Entrepreneurship and Business Management (ICEBM 2016) Tainan, Taiwan – November 17-18, 2016 ISBN : 978-979-9234-59-9 The Fifth International Conference on Entrepreneurship and Business Management (ICEBM 2016) Tainan, Taiwan – November 17-18, 2016 ISBN : 978-979-9234-59-9 The Fifth International Conference on Entrepreneurship and Business Management (ICEBM 2016) Tainan, Taiwan – November 17-18, 2016 ISBN : 978-979-9234-59-9 The Fifth International Conference on Entrepreneurship and Business Management (ICEBM 2016) Tainan, Taiwan – November 17-18, 2016 ISBN : 978-979-9234-59-9 The Fifth International Conference on Entrepreneurship and Business Management (ICEBM 2016) Tainan, Taiwan – November 17-18, 2016 ISBN : 978-979-9234-59-9 272 273 274 275 276 277 278