The first part of this paper compares and contrasts the theoretical and practical differences between formal research and business proposals. It gives some commonalities as well as the differences existing between them. To get these differences, it is appropriate to segment or divide the respective parts of both designs in order to have a better understanding.
On the overview, a business proposal has the Executive Summary, which is meant to give a basis of what is in the content of the paper and give a brief on what to expect when reading the research project. This is generally like an introduction but more in detail of what one can find in the paper. On the other hand, a research project holds an abstract as an overview (Blackmon, 2005). This is to mean that it is what summarizes the project giving the methodologies and research design followed. Contrasts between the two exist also in Report Formatting. This part is particularly significant because it distinguishes what one has in the paper. A research project is strictly connected to the use of APA formats unless there are other instructions on how to do the same (Saunders & Lewis, 2006). For the business proposal, it can use a wide range of formats sometimes propriety.
The similarity existing between the two is on the Preliminary Data Gathering process for both the research project and a business proposal (Blackmon, 2005). They all rely on previous works at some point because the business proposal relies on similar or previous internal situations or a variety of cases from the competition while the research project relies on Ideas based from other scholarly results meaning that both have to outsource for some data from other sources (Saunders & Lewis, 2006). However, for the literature review, a business proposal looks into industry and proprietary, specific literature while the research project looks into the primarily scholarly literature mostly peer reviewed in articulating the context of the research study.
When it comes to the definition of the problem, the business proposal frames it through a business concern in decision making while the research project has a careful framing the entire area of concern mainly a contribution to research from other scholars (Saunders & Lewis, 2006). The theoretical framework is more used in research projects while the business proposal does not have any of that kind. For the research question, it is more like similar between the two since each addresses a specific formulated question and has to come up with an answer at the end of the paper whatsoever.
The research project has the capability to perform things empirically and bring about informative data from the same but business proposal only analysis alternatives (Blackmon, 2005). On the same note, a research project is more in detail because it has to generate own data for the researcher to come up with some discovery probably writing an article or a book (Saunders & Lewis, 2006). However, for the business proposal, it is lenient in the discoveries because one only searches current data from available sources and from there can make a decision.
The conclusion of both the busness proposal and the research project is more similar because they all conclude the paper and give a detailed summary of what was in the paper and probably mention the way forward. However, for the business proposal, the conclusion is similar to recommendations but for research project, the scope is by far limited to what results were obtained from the study (Saunders & Lewis, 2006).
This part is a completed literature review on an article “The relationship between customer satisfaction and loyalty: cross-industry differences” refuting the hypotheses that there is no relationship between customer satisfaction and loyalty. This is because evidently, the relationship between loyalty and customer satisfaction is purely evident and enormous.
Satisfaction is the ideal tier in the customer-company relationship (Bernhardt, 2000). In order for a particular company, to differentiate and make itself unique from the competition of other companies, it will have to first, engage in efforts to move customers ideally from the first tier of the established relationship, satisfaction, and then to the second tier, which is loyalty. These two are, therefore, what establishes the success of the company and how it will fair in the future operations.
A loyalty model of a company incorporates both psychological as well as behavioral components to precisely, compute an ideal loyalty index (Fredericks, 2001). The results of the company’s loyalty index are then of considerable use by the company in creating market segments, which do dominant in the classification of customers’ relationships exist currently with the company. Customers in this case are in-group and segmented based on their comfort level with their ideal relationship with the respective company. It is from this loyalty that the results hold as strategic for the respective company because they help in alerting the company to departing customers (Bernhardt, 2000). Therefore, the company on this case can make changes and strategize on approaches, which will be ideal in retaining these customers. The two loyalties and customer satisfaction, therefore, hail as tools for maintaining success of the company through maintaining its customers and increasing their trust and attachment to the company.
It is from the developed loyalty index that a similar index is developed showing the potential customers and, therefore, helping the company look out for areas to expand their operations and increase the profits enormously. This index is an appropriate classification of customers based on individual likelihood to switch from individual current company to the company on the line (Fredericks, 2001). Again, it is from this that a company can make its operations easy in making decisions on where it can allocate advertising and marketing resources to convert customers as well as retain them. Therefore, without the two loyalties and satisfaction of the customer, a company cannot make the right decisions when it comes to marketing and advertising.
Many scholars who refute the above hypothesis have argued it. They say that the financial performance of organizations rely on the high-levell generation of loyalty and customer satisfaction (Fredericks, 2001). This is to mean that the two are more like inseparable in service organizations because they determine the fate of the company.
In a study, conducted on European telecom company that comprised of four different businesses, one serving consumers, the other being companies transactions (Fredericks, 2001). The study involved a longitudinal analysis correlating between financial performance, customer satisfaction, loyalty and customer dissatisfaction (Fredericks, 2001). This was in the context of an operational telecommunications industry where lowered customer satisfaction over the services offered by the company indicated in the lowering of people’s trust over the company and lowered motivation in anticipating the services of the company in future, therefore, lowering loyalty over the company (Bernhardt, 2000). The company was offering a variety of telephone and Internet services in the preliminary phase to a high-volume base of customers in a hugely competitive market in which it occupied as a monopoly. However, with time, people lost their loyalty to the company and soon many other companies started coming up and reduced customer satisfaction led to a shift of many customers to other companies.
A notable contribution is one by Bernhardt, 2000, whose study empirically showed that in a context of consumer satisfaction and loyalty, they had positive correlation. In this case, an analysis of time-series data concluded a positive and significant relationship between customer satisfaction changes, with a change in the loyalty over the company.
However, there are still a number of scholars contributing to the same mostly in the service operations and services marketing literatures arguing that service contexts in customer satisfaction and loyalty have no correlation and that they do not have any relation with an organization’s financial performance (Anderson, 2000). Additionally lack of correlation between loyalty and customer satisfaction may prevail when there are few alternatives in the market. In this case, the customers do not have many options with them and, therefore, they keep drawing their loyalty to the company even with the fact that, they still are not satisfied with the company’s services (Bernhardt, 2000). Lack of choice and opportunities to have their loyalty change to another company is what reduces the relations. It is not that the customers remain loyal to the company because they feel satisfied; it is a lack of opportunity to challenge the same (Anderson, 2000). The customers already have the few market alternatives perceptions in mind and, therefore, hold on with the will to stay with or alternatively recommend the company to another person for the services (Bernhardt, 2000). Further to this, the customer might remain loyal to a dissatisfying company in its services only because it is strong and holds a top market position making it better than the upcoming companies do. Gauging from these arguments, it is therefore arguable that loyalty and customer satisfaction have a great correlation unlike the hypothesis stipulated in this paper and this is especially in a case where businesses offer services to customers in an expanded niche.