Business Customer eXperience Alignment Framework: Improving Customer Satisfaction

Full text

31th Bled eConference Digital Transformation – Meeting the Challenges
(June 17 - 20, 2018, Bled, Slovenia)
N. Surname & N. Surname (Editors) (leave empty)
Business Customer eXperience alignment framework:
improving customer satisfaction
FELIX GRAS, PASCAL RAVESTEIJN, MARLIES VAN STEENBERGEN, ROLAND
BIJVANK
Abstract Globalization and technological innovation has led to an increasing competition
between telecommunication service providers and has eroded traditional product- and
service-based differentiation. One way to gain a competitive advantage is to create
distinctiveness by improving customer experience in such a manner that it leads to higher
customer satisfaction and loyalty. One of the drivers to improve the customer experience
is the service interface. To improve this service interface, organizations must get insight
into their customer interaction process. The amount of data about customers and the
service provider processes is increasing and becoming more readily available for
analysis. Process mining is a technique to provide insight into these processes. In this
paper, a framework is presented to improve the customer satisfaction by alignment of the
business service delivery process and the customer experience by applying process
mining.
Keywords: • Customer satisfaction • Customer journey • Interaction process •
Service quality • Process mining • Telecommunication industry •
CORRESPONDENCE ADDRESS: ing. Felix Gras MSc, KPN, The Netherlands, e-mail:
felix.gras@kpn.com Dr. ing. Pascal Ravesteijn, Dr. ir. Marlies van Steenbergen Drs. Roland
Bijvank, HU University of Applied Sciences, Utrecht, The Netherlands, e-mail:
pascal.ravesteijn@hu.nl; marlies.vansteenbergen@hu.nl; roland.bijvank@hu.nl

2
31TH BLED ECONFERENCE DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION – MEETING THE CHALLENGES
(JUNE 17 - 20, 2018, BLED, SLOVENIA)
Felix Gras, Pascal Ravesteijn, Marlies van Steenbergen, Roland Bijvank: Business
Customer eXperience alignment framework: improving customer satisfaction
1 Introduction
In a saturated telecommunication market where the offer of services is huge, the options for
the customer are overwhelming, and government regulations force providers to make services
more transparent and more comparable, the risk of a commodity trap is lurking. Services are
more and more alike, and customers make their decisions based on price. This can start a
negative price cycle which leads to a ‘commodity trap’ (Lanen, 2008). According to Fornell
(1992), one of the strategies in the telco industry to avoid a commodity trap is to improve the
customer satisfaction as this has a strong positive effect on the customer loyalty intentions.
Overall satisfaction has a positive effect on customer usage of telco services (Bolton & Lemon,
1999) and has a positive effect on retention (Gustafsson, Johnson, & Roos, 2005). Customer
experience drives customer satisfaction (Pine & Gilmore, 1998) and service providers must
innovate on customer experience instead of only on services. Customer experience is based on
the interactions between the customer and the service provider, and the gain in value for the
customer and the provider is created through these interactions (Addis & Holbrook, 2001). In
regards to customer experience, there is a distinction between direct or indirect contact between
customer and service provider (Meyer & Schwager, 2007) and it is strictly personal (Gentile,
Spiller, & Noci, 2007). It is not only the touchpoints that matter when the customer interacts
with the company, but it is the full journey of service delivery, service interruption or complaint
handling that counts (Rawson, Duncan, & Jones, 2013). To improve the customer satisfaction,
service providers must understand and get insight into this direct, personal and end-to-end
interaction process that drives the customer satisfaction. Service providers can use new
technologies and processes in making a personalized customer journey with contextual
interaction based on where the customer is, in her or his journey. Hereby customers will stay
because they benefit from the journey itself (Edelman & Singer, 2015). However, the
interaction process between customer and service provider has increased in complexity due to
the ability to interact via different channels and the influence the customer has in the service
delivery process. More refined process analysis techniques are needed to improve the customer
interaction process. Through process automation and digitization on the customer side, there
is an enormous growth of data about both operational processes and customer actions. Process
mining techniques allow service providers to extract knowledge from information systems that
store process-related data (Van Der Aalst, 2016). These techniques provide ways to discover,
monitor and improve processes. The combination of event data and business process models
gives new opportunities for process-centric analytics (Van Der Aalst, 2011).
2 Research question and paper structure
In the IT research field, scholars have identified IT/business alignment as an important
principle for the success of IT deployment and implementation. Compared to this, the research
in this paper is driven by the need to improve the alignment between the business processes
and the customer experience through getting insight into the interaction process by applying
process mining. The objective of this study is to improve the customer experience of service
delivery by using the available data in information systems of an organization. For this a
business customer experience alignment framework (BCX-framework) is developed to

31TH BLED ECONFERENCE DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION – MEETING THE CHALLENGES
(JUNE 17 - 20, 2018, BLED, SLOVENIA)
Felix Gras, Pascal Ravesteijn, Marlies van Steenbergen, Roland Bijvank: Business
Customer eXperience alignment framework: improving customer satisfaction
3
manage process mining analyses. The contribution of this paper is both practical and academic.
For service providers, it gives a guideline for the alignment process between the business
processes and the customer experience by applying process mining. The academic contribution
is a new framework which integrates the service quality model (SERVQUAL) with the process
mining model and the customer journey (mapping). Also, concepts out of the marketing
research field (SERVQUAL model and customer journey mapping), and the data science
research field (process mining) are connected.
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. In the next section the research method
used, design science research, is explained. Section 3 describes the theoretical background of
the research. In section 4 the framework is presented and in section 5 it is applied to the case
of a service delivery process in the Telecommunications industry. The paper ends with
conclusions and suggestions for further research.
3 Research method
As part of the research a framework is developed. Therefore, a design science research method
is followed based on Peffers’s research methodology for information systems research (Peffers,
Tuunanen, Rothenberger, & Chatterjee, 2007). The steps defined by Peffers et al., are
implemented as follows:
1. Problem identification and motivation. The problem motivating our research is how to
avoid the commodity trap that results from services becoming increasingly similar and
thus only competing on price.
2. Define the objectives for a solution. The objective of the framework is to support process
mining analyses (using available data) in order to improve the service delivery process in
such a way that it increases customer satisfaction.
3. Design and development. Based on extant literature we operationalized the concepts that
are relevant to improving service delivery and related them to each other in a framework:
customer satisfaction, service quality, customer journey, and process mining analysis.
4. Demonstration. We demonstrate the use of the framework by applying it to the service
delivery process of a large Dutch telecommunication service provider. The
telecommunication industry and especially the Dutch telecommunication industry is a
saturated and highly competitive market (Albrecht, 2017), showing characteristics of high
costs of attracting new customers and the commodity trap of price.
5. Evaluation. Though a first application of the framework showed its usefulness, real
evaluation of the framework still has to be done.
6. Communication. Communication is done by presenting the results and publishing a
research report and this paper.
4 Theoretical background
The key concepts of the BCX framework are customer satisfaction, service quality, customer
journey and process mining.

4
31TH BLED ECONFERENCE DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION – MEETING THE CHALLENGES
(JUNE 17 - 20, 2018, BLED, SLOVENIA)
Felix Gras, Pascal Ravesteijn, Marlies van Steenbergen, Roland Bijvank: Business
Customer eXperience alignment framework: improving customer satisfaction
Customer satisfaction is frequently measured by the Net Promoter Score (NPS); the
willingness to promote a company by a customer is a strong indicator of loyalty (Reichheld,
2003). However, NPS is not the only indicator companies need to monitor and manage to
realize success (Grisaffe, 2007). Therefore, the Net Promoter Score has evolved into the Net
Promoter System (Reichheld & Markey, 2011). One of the basics of the system is the feedback
that is given by the customer on individual events such as particular transactions or specific
parts of the customer’s experience. This granularity allows the company to improve specific
parts of the customer journey or delivery aspects. NPS provides feedback on brand level or on
transaction level e.g. delivery. These are ‘the remember experience’ or event measurements.
NPS also provides feedback on interaction with the company (e.g. with employees). These are
the in-the-moment experience or contact measurements. In the case study, the NPS event
measurement service delivery is used.
Service quality is a major determinant of satisfaction and has a positive relationship with
satisfaction in both the short and the long run (Oliver, 1993). A recent study confirms that this
relationship also exists in the e-commerce industry (Ribbink, Van Riel, Liljander, & Streukens,
2004). Service quality and customer satisfaction are two independent but closely related
constructs from a customer’s point of view. When service quality increases this leads to an
increased customer satisfaction (Sureshchandar, Rajendran, & Anantharaman, 2002). The
service quality which the customer perceives is influenced by the technical aspect (“what”
service is provided), the functional aspect (“how” the service is provided) and the image of the
organization or brand (Grönroos, 1984). Originally the well-known SERVQUAL model
distinguishes ten service quality determinants which later were captured in five generic service
quality determinants: reliability, assurance, tangibles, empathy, and responsiveness
(Parasuraman et al., 1991). Customers use these determinants as criteria in judging the service
quality, reliability is the most critical determinant (Zeithaml, Parasuraman, & Berry, 1990). In
research about satisfiers and dissatisfiers of perceived service quality by Johnston (1995), one
of the conclusions was that responsiveness is a key component in providing satisfaction and
that lack of it is a major source of dissatisfaction. Reliability is predominantly a source of
dissatisfaction not of satisfaction (Johnston, 1995). To measure the performance of service, the
SERVQUAL model uses the gap between the customer’s expectation and customer’s perceived
experience of the service performance (Parasuraman, Zeithaml, & Berry, 1985). The
SERVQUAL model enables to identify systematically service quality gaps between variables
that influence the quality of service delivery from a customer point of view. Five quality gaps
are identified: 1) incorrect perception, 2) incorrect specification, 3) incorrect delivery, 4)
incorrect communication and 5) incorrect experience. The first four gaps refer to the
organizational aspects of quality while gap 5 refers to the customer aspect of quality. In further
research, the service quality model was elaborated in an extended service quality model in
which gap 5 was identified as a function of the first 4 gaps with a positive relation between the
size of gap 5: customer based measure and the size of gap 1-4: service provider based measure
(Parasuraman, Berry, & Zeithaml, 1991). In the framework, the service quality is presented as
a function of the differences between expectations and performance along the five quality
determinants.

31TH BLED ECONFERENCE DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION – MEETING THE CHALLENGES
(JUNE 17 - 20, 2018, BLED, SLOVENIA)
Felix Gras, Pascal Ravesteijn, Marlies van Steenbergen, Roland Bijvank: Business
Customer eXperience alignment framework: improving customer satisfaction
5
Customer journey nowadays encompasses a myriad of touchpoints in multiple channels and
media (Lemon & Verhoef, 2016). Norton & Pine (2013) define customer journey as “the
sequence of events - whether designed or not - that customers go through to learn about,
purchase and interact with company offerings - including commodities, goods, services or
experiences”. The aim of customer journey design is “… to deliver value to the customer,
profitability to the company and differentiation from the competition” (Norton & Pine, 2013,
p.12).
There are various techniques to analyse customer journeys related to different fields and needs.
Some techniques require manual labour by in-depth interviews, while other techniques require
big-data and automated algorithms. Techniques for analysing customer journeys are often used
to analyse and improve services from a customer point of view (Dunn & Davis, 2003; Lee &
Karahasanović, 2013; Robertson, 2015; Schmidt-Subramanian, 2014). Several methods have
been developed to analyse the interaction process between the customer and the service
provider. The most common methods are the Brand Touch Wheel (Dunn & Davis, 2003), the
customer journey canvas (Stickdorn & Schneider, 2010) and the customer journey map
(Schmidt-Subramanian, 2014). Customer journey mapping originated from the widely used
service blueprint technique which applies a process map to show the service delivery process
from a customer perspective (Shostack, 1987). From a customer point of view, all touchpoints
from beginning to the end of the service delivery are described. A touchpoint is defined as “an
instance or a potential point of communication or interaction between a customer and a service
provider” (Halvorsrud, Lee, Haugstveit, & Følstad, 2014). The customer journey can depict
the negative and positive touchpoints with the customer. This will give an emotion-curve
through all customer interaction steps and enables improvement of the services. In this study,
the service blueprint is used as a starting point and extended with the timeline of the customer
journey map. The service blueprint consists of the following five components: customer
actions, onstage/visible contact employee actions, backstage/invisible contact employee
actions, support processes and physical evidence (Bitner, Ostrom, & Morgan, 2008). Service
blueprint can be further extended by creating customer groups based on personas (Cooper,
Reimann, & Cronin, 2007).
Process mining is a technique to extract knowledge from event logs that are derived from
information systems (Van Der Aalst, et al., 2011). The advantage of mining processes from
event logs is that there is no room for subjectivity because the process model is based on the
process executions recorded in the event log. Process mining aims to bridge the gap between
data-centric analysis techniques and model-based process analysis techniques. There are three
basic process mining techniques: process discovery, conformance checking and process
enhancement (Van Der Aalst, 2012). For analysis of the interaction process in the case study
as part of this research, process discovery techniques will be used (De Weerdt, De Backer,
Vanthienen, & Baesens, 2012). There are three key methodologies to support organizations
with their execution of process mining projects: 1) the Process Diagnostic Method (PDM)
(Bozkaya, Gabriels, & Van Der Werf, 2009), 2) the L* life-cycle model (Van Der Aalst, 2016)
and the Process Mining Project Methodology (PM2) (Van Eck, Lu, Leemans, & Van Der Aalst,
2015). While PDM aims to quickly retrieve insights from event logs in the absence of domain

6
31TH BLED ECONFERENCE DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION – MEETING THE CHALLENGES
(JUNE 17 - 20, 2018, BLED, SLOVENIA)
Felix Gras, Pascal Ravesteijn, Marlies van Steenbergen, Roland Bijvank: Business
Customer eXperience alignment framework: improving customer satisfaction
knowledge, the L* life cycle methodology proposes a more profound step-wise approach to
discover a control flow model which can be extended with insights from other process mining
perspectives. A limitation of the L* life-cycle model is that it is primarily designed for the
analysis of structured processes and aims at discovering a single integrated process model. The
PM² methodology emphasizes the iterative character of process data analysis and states that
both process models and analytical models can be generated from event data. Furthermore, it
is suitable for the analysis of both structured and unstructured processes. Therefore, the PM²
methodology is most suitable to be used in this study as part of the framework for analysing
the interaction process. PM2 is based on six stages: planning, extraction, data processing,
mining and analysis, evaluation and process improvement. Stage 1 and 2 are needed for
initialization of the project; stage 3, 4 and 5 are performed in one or more analysis iterations
with specific research questions; if the findings are satisfactory they can be used in stage 6 for
process improvement.
5 Business Customer eXperience alignment framework
The BCX alignment framework is developed based on the concepts of service quality,
customer journey and process mining and gives guidelines for how to align business processes
to touchpoints in a customer journey in order to improve the customer experience (Figure 1).
The framework combines the perspectives of 1) getting the right question: examine the
expectations of the customer, 2) getting the right data: extracting relevant data about the
customer interaction process and 3) getting the right analysis: gaining insight into the perceived
service during the interaction process. These perspectives, and with the use of process mining
project methodology, guides the alignment of business processes and customer journey’s in
order to gain more customer satisfaction and loyalty. For the right question, the service quality
determinants of the SERVQUAL model are used, to get insight in the satisfiers and dissatisfiers
of the customer experience. For the right data, the five components of customer journey
mapping are used, to get the right process and customer data. For the right analysis, process
mining techniques are applied by performing the Process Mining Project Methodology (PM2)).

31TH BLED ECONFERENCE DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION – MEETING THE CHALLENGES
(JUNE 17 - 20, 2018, BLED, SLOVENIA)
Felix Gras, Pascal Ravesteijn, Marlies van Steenbergen, Roland Bijvank: Business
Customer eXperience alignment framework: improving customer satisfaction
7
Figure 1: The Business Customer eXperience alignment framework
Figure 2 shows the integrated model of the three concepts on which the BCX-framework is
developed. According to the SERVQUAL model, the integrated model is based on the gap
analysis between the customer expected and perceived service (gap 5). Including with the
customer world, this is the customer view of the model. The size of the gap can be analysed
with the customer journey data and depends on the nature of the organizational gaps which is
the organizational view of the model.
Service Provider
Organizational
GAPS
1. ∆ knowledge
2. ∆ specification
3. ∆ delivery
4. ∆ communication
Customer
Service Quality
determinants
1. Reliability
2. Assurance
3. Tangibles
4. Empathy
5. Responsiveness
Journey
Experience
GAP
5. ∆ experience
1. Customer actions
2. Onstage actions
3. Backstage actions
4. Support processes
5. Physical evidence
the right
data
the right
analysis
the right
question
Process Mining Project Methodology (PM²)
expected service
perceived service
(process) model
Management perceptions of
the consumer expectations
Customers “world”
Word of mouth
communications
Personal needs
Past experience
Perceived
service
software system
Service delivery (including
pre and post contacts)
event logs
discovery
conformance
enhancement
records events:
1. Customer actions
2. Onstage/visible
employee actions
3. Backstage/invisible
employee actions
4. Support processes
5. Physical evidenc
Translation of perceptions into service
quality specifications
GAP 2
GAP 1
GAP 3
GAP 5
expected
service
Customer
journey
External communications to the consumer
GAP 4
Service Quality
determinants: RATER

8
31TH BLED ECONFERENCE DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION – MEETING THE CHALLENGES
(JUNE 17 - 20, 2018, BLED, SLOVENIA)
Felix Gras, Pascal Ravesteijn, Marlies van Steenbergen, Roland Bijvank: Business
Customer eXperience alignment framework: improving customer satisfaction
Figure 2: Integrated model
6 Demonstration: application in a Telecommunication service provider
To test the applicability of the BCX framework, it was applied at a large Dutch
telecommunication service provider with a market share of approximately 40% for fixed
services. In the case study, the delivery process of internet services (internet, voice, and TV)
via a fixed network is analysed. The service provider aims to be a customer-centric provider
and strives to improve the NPS by getting more insight into the customer interaction process.
The BCX framework was operationalized in three ways. First, existing customer satisfaction
surveys were used to get insight into the service quality determinants (the right question) as
well as the expected and perceived service. To this end, customer satisfaction survey results
are related to the SERVQUAL determinants. Second, the required data sources are determined,
based on the five service blue print components. Third, process mining techniques were applied
with the PM2 approach, and the open source ProM 6.7 toolkit.
7606 customer satisfaction surveys for the service delivery were collected in a period from 01-
01-2016 till 28-03-2017. After data cleaning 5302 surveys appeared useful for further research.
Not all cases could be matched with the customer interaction data, which decreased the total
number of cases to 4065. Besides the NPS question, the customer satisfaction survey contained
12 questions: 6 customer journey event questions and 6 service delivery aspect questions with
a 5-point Likert scale. To examine the relation between these 12 questions and the NPS
recommendation score, a correlation analysis was performed with the Pearson’s R method
(Bryman & Bell, 2015). Table 1 shows the outcomes of the comparison between those survey
questions related to the 5 determinants of the SERVQUAL model (column 1 and 3). The
number in parenthesis indicates the ranking of the correlation between the 12 survey questions
and the NPS score (column 2).
Survey questions
Correlation (Pearson’s R)
SQ determinant
Service provider follow up promises
.622** (2)
Reliability
Progress information
.599** (3)
Responsiveness
Service provider took responsibility
.649** (1)
Assurance
Call centre is easy to reach
.501** (11)
Empathy
Information clear and understandable
.579** (4)
Tangibles
Table 1: Relationship between service delivery aspects and SQ determinants
Out of the 12 survey questions, the questions with the highest correlation with the NPS score
where service delivery aspects questions. This confirms that the service quality determinants
are indeed important for customer satisfaction of the telecom industry. Besides the correlation
analysis, a regression analysis was performed using the Enter and Stepwise regression method
for priority analysis. The result is depicted in Figure 3, where the relation between the

31TH BLED ECONFERENCE DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION – MEETING THE CHALLENGES
(JUNE 17 - 20, 2018, BLED, SLOVENIA)
Felix Gras, Pascal Ravesteijn, Marlies van Steenbergen, Roland Bijvank: Business
Customer eXperience alignment framework: improving customer satisfaction
9
satisfaction level, based on the Likert score (x-axis), and the degree of importance with the
NPS recommendation score (y-axis) of all 12 survey questions is shown.
The higher the degree of importance with NPS and the lower the satisfaction level, the higher
the priority for improvement. A remark must be made about the items ‘period between request
and delivery’ and ‘pace from order to delivery’. Both have a low degree of importance and are
not significant. However, they are highly correlated (.800**). This means that in regression
analysis these two items interfere with each other, which leads to a lower score.
Figure 3: Priority analysis
Figure 3 shows that ‘service provider took responsibility’ is a candidate for improvement
through a low satisfaction level and a high degree of importance with NPS. Therefore, this
topic was further analysed by investigating the degree of interaction between the service
provider and the customer.
For the case study, the interaction data was collected from twelve different systems. The basis
was formed by the customer satisfaction survey data and enriched with data for the customer
journey, i.e. order process, shop & web-site visits, call centre, engineer, marketing

10
31TH BLED ECONFERENCE DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION – MEETING THE CHALLENGES
(JUNE 17 - 20, 2018, BLED, SLOVENIA)
Felix Gras, Pascal Ravesteijn, Marlies van Steenbergen, Roland Bijvank: Business
Customer eXperience alignment framework: improving customer satisfaction
communications and customer profile information. The customer journey was made more
specific, by adding the attributes of customer profile, e.g. singles or families, and the customer
situation, e.g. new or moving internet line. A query was developed for creating the event log
for process mining. Basic process mining techniques such as filtering, process discovery and
log visualizer were used. For the above mentioned topic ‘service provider took responsibility’,
the event log contained 1373 cases with 1020 variants, and 39.676 events and divided into 584
detractors cases, with a NPS score of 1-6 and 789 promoter cases with a NPS score of 9-10.
Several explorative analysis iterations have been performed, each iteration leading to more
detailed questions that were investigated in additional iterations.
Figure 4: Interaction process model
For illustration purposes, Figure 4 shows the process model created with the ProM Plug-in
Inductive Visual Miner. The aim of this analysis was to investigate whether a difference exists
in interaction process and the degree of interactions between detractors and promoters.
event
sub-event
Detractor (584)
Promoter (789)
number of
events
Average
service time
number of
events
Average
service time
call
Change
78
00:10:05
56
00:07:42
call
Churn
16
00:12:00
18
00:03:15
call
Complaint
328
00:14:20
200
00:14:41
call
Orientation
52
00:05:09
52
00:06:30
call
Sales
86
00:11:11
78
00:10:09
call
Question
1044
00:13:12
752
00:12:13
Table 2: Detail call information detractors and promoters
Moreover, as can be noticed in Figure 4, the phone calls of detractors take place at the
beginning of the delivery process, while the calls of promoters take place after installation.
Furthermore, the analysis showed that detractors place more calls than promoters, i.e. 1604
calls and 1156 calls as shown in Table 2). In this case study, process mining gave more insight
into the interaction process and the moment of when the events occur in the journey.
Call
detractor
Call
promotor
Call
promoter

31TH BLED ECONFERENCE DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION – MEETING THE CHALLENGES
(JUNE 17 - 20, 2018, BLED, SLOVENIA)
Felix Gras, Pascal Ravesteijn, Marlies van Steenbergen, Roland Bijvank: Business
Customer eXperience alignment framework: improving customer satisfaction
11
7 Conclusions and further research
The objective of this research was to improve the service delivery process in such a way that
it increases the customer experience and makes optimal use of available data. To this end, a
Business Customer eXperience alignment framework was developed, by combining the
concepts of service quality, customer journey and process mining techniques. To test the
usability of the framework it was applied in a case study to a telecommunication service
provider. The case study shows that the introduction of customer journey data analysis, using
process mining techniques, leads to an iterative cycle of analysis and refined question
formulation. This cycle stimulates the generation of new questions leading to deeper insights.
Based on this study we conclude that the use of process mining provides many possibilities to
explore and analyse processes. Process mining techniques are an add-on to existing analysis
techniques and can be used to gain more insight into processes by creating various views on
the customer journey with data.
To improve the framework directions of further research are provided by the three perspectives:
getting the right question, getting the right data and getting the right analysis. For getting the
right question, future work could focus on the exploration of the satisfiers and dissatisfiers of
the customer journey related to the SERVQUAL determinants and extend the NPS
measurement of the service delivery with the NPS contact measurement of the interaction
moment, e.g. call or engineer visit. For getting the right data, future work could focus on
extending the customer journey of delivery with data of the orientation phase prior the delivery
and add journeys that are running at the same time, e.g. a delivery journey and a malfunction
of another service of the customer. For getting the right analysis, future work could focus on
developing process mining techniques that support analysis of processes with high variance
and multiple journeys in parallel.
References
Addis, M., & Holbrook, M. B. (2001). On the conceptual link between mass customization and
experiential consumption: An explosion of subjectivity. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 1(1),
50-66.
Albrecht, K. (2017). Dutch broadband 2016-Q4. (PDF). Houten, The Netherlands: Telecompaper.
Bryman, A., & Bell, E. (2015). Business research methods. (p. 351-353) Oxford University Press, USA.
Bitner, M. J., Ostrom, A. L., & Morgan, F. N. (2008). Service blueprinting: A practical technique for
service innovation. California Management Review, 50(3), 66-94.
Bolton, R. N., & Lemon, K. N. (1999). A dynamic model of customers' usage of services: Usage as an
antecedent and consequence of satisfaction. Journal of Marketing Research, 171-186.
Bozkaya, M., Gabriels, J., & Van Der Werf, J. M. (2009, February). Process diagnostics: a method based
on process mining. In Information, Process, and Knowledge Management, 2009. eKNOW'09.
International Conference on (pp. 22-27). IEEE.
Bryman, A., & Bell, E. (2015). Business research methods Oxford University Press, USA.
Cooper, A., Reimann, R., Cronin, D., & Noessel, C. (2014). About face: the essentials of interaction
design. John Wiley & Sons.

12
31TH BLED ECONFERENCE DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION – MEETING THE CHALLENGES
(JUNE 17 - 20, 2018, BLED, SLOVENIA)
Felix Gras, Pascal Ravesteijn, Marlies van Steenbergen, Roland Bijvank: Business
Customer eXperience alignment framework: improving customer satisfaction
De Weerdt, J., De Backer, M., Vanthienen, J., & Baesens, B. (2012). A multi-dimensional quality
assessment of state-of-the-art process discovery algorithms using real-life event logs. Information
Systems, 37(7), 654-676.
Dunn, M., & Davis, S. M. (2003). Building brands from the inside. Marketing Management, 12(3), 32-
37.
Edelman, D. C., & Singer, M. (2015). Competing on customer journeys. Harvard Business Review, 88-
100.
Fornell, C. (1992). A national customer satisfaction barometer: The Swedish experience. The Journal of
Marketing, 6-21.
Gentile, C., Spiller, N., & Noci, G. (2007). How to sustain the customer experience: An overview of
experience components that co-create value with the customer. European Management Journal,
25(5), 395-410.
Grisaffe, D. B. (2007). Questions about the ultimate question: Conceptual considerations in evaluating
Reichheld's net promoter score (NPS). Journal of Consumer Satisfaction, Dissatisfaction, and
Complaining Behavior, 20, 36.
Grönroos, C. (1984). A service quality model and its marketing implications. European Journal of
Marketing, 18(4), 36-44.
Gustafsson, A., Johnson, M. D., & Roos, I. (2005). The effects of customer satisfaction, relationship
commitment dimensions, and triggers on customer retention. Journal of Marketing, 69(4), 210-
218.
Halvorsrud, R., Lee, E., Haugstveit, I. M., & Følstad, A. (2014, June). Components of a visual language
for service design. In ServDes. 2014 Service Future; Proceedings of the fourth Service Design
and Service Innovation Conference; Lancaster University; United Kingdom; 9-11 April 2014
(No. 099, pp. 291-300). Linköping University Electronic Press.
Johnston, R. (1995). The determinants of service quality: Satisfiers and dissatisfiers. International Journal
of Service Industry Management, 6(5), 53-71.
Lanen, R. v. (2008). In Verburgh L., Tamminga T.(Eds.), Distinguish yourself! increase your margin with
added value. Utrecht: Berenschot Groep B.V.
Lee, E., & Karahasanović, A. (2013). Can business management benefit from service journey modeling
language. Paper presented at the Proceedings of ICSEA 2013 Eighth International Conference on
Software Engineering Advances, 579-582.
Lemon, K. N., & Verhoef, P. C. (2016). Understanding customer experience throughout the customer
journey. Journal of Marketing, 80(6), 69-96.
Meyer, C., & Schwager, A. (2007). Customer experience. Harvard Business Review. 1-11.
Norton, D. W., & Pine, B. J. (2013). Using the customer journey to road test and refine the business
model. Strategy & Leadership, 41(2), 12-17.
Oliver, R. L. (1993). A conceptual model of service quality and service satisfaction: Compatible goals,
different concepts. Advances in Services Marketing and Management, 2(4), 65-85.
Parasuraman, A., Berry, L. L., & Zeithaml, V. A. (1991). Perceived service quality as a customer‐based
performance measure: An empirical examination of organizational barriers using an extended
service quality model. Human Resource Management, 30(3), 335-364.
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1985). A conceptual model of service quality and its
implications for future research. The Journal of Marketing. 41-50.
Peffers, K., Tuunanen, T., Rothenberger, M. A., & Chatterjee, S. (2007). A design science research
methodology for information systems research. Journal of Management Information Systems,
24(3), 45-77.
Pine, B. J., & Gilmore, J. H. (1998). Welcome to the experience economy. Harvard Business Review, 76,
97-105.

31TH BLED ECONFERENCE DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION – MEETING THE CHALLENGES
(JUNE 17 - 20, 2018, BLED, SLOVENIA)
Felix Gras, Pascal Ravesteijn, Marlies van Steenbergen, Roland Bijvank: Business
Customer eXperience alignment framework: improving customer satisfaction
13
Rawson, A., Duncan, E., & Jones, C. (2013). The truth about customer experience. Harvard Business
Review, 91(9), 90-98.
Reichheld, F. F. (2003). The one number you need to grow. Harvard Business Review, 81(12), 46-55.
Reichheld, F. F., & Markey, R. (2011). The ultimate question 2.0: How net promoter companies thrive
in a customer-driven world Harvard Business Press.
Ribbink, D., Van Riel, A. C., Liljander, V., & Streukens, S. (2004). Comfort your online customer:
Quality, trust and loyalty on the internet. Managing Service Quality: An International Journal,
14(6), 446-456.
Robertson, B. (2015). Connecting process to customer: Take the customer journey. (No. G00290973).
Stamford, USA: Gartner.
Schmidt-Subramanian, M. (2014). How journey maps improve CX measurement efforts. (No. 119113).
Forrester Research, Inc.
Shostack, G. L. (1987). Service positioning through structural change. The Journal of Marketing, 34-43.
Stickdorn, M., Schneider, J., Andrews, K., & Lawrence, A. (2011). This is service design thinking: Basics,
tools, cases (Vol. 1). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Sureshchandar, G., Rajendran, C., & Anantharaman, R. (2002). The relationship between service quality
and customer satisfaction–a factor specific approach. Journal of Services Marketing, 16(4), 363-
379.
Van Der Aalst, W., Adriansyah, A., De Medeiros, A. K. A., Arcieri, F., Baier, T., Blickle, T., ... &
Burattin, A. (2011, August). Process mining manifesto. In International Conference on Business
Process Management (pp. 169-194). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
Van Der Aalst, W. (2012). Process mining: Overview and opportunities. ACM Transactions on
Management Information Systems (TMIS), 3(2), 7.
Van Der Aalst, W. M. (2016). Process mining: data science in action. Springer.
Van Eck, M. L., Lu, X., Leemans, S. J., & Van Der Aalst, W. M. (2015, June). PM2: A Process Mining
Project Methodology. In International Conference on Advanced Information Systems
Engineering (pp. 297-313). Springer, Cham.
Zeithaml, V. A., Parasuraman, A., & Berry, L. L. (1990). Delivering quality service: Balancing customer
perceptions and expectations Simon and Schuster.