Customer Value in the Oriented Strandboard Industry
Keywords:Oriented strandboard, OSB, perceived value, logistic regression
This study examines the attributes of oriented strandboard (OSB) sheathing that influence OSB wholesale buyers' perceptions of OSB value when choosing alternative OSB products/brands or suppliers in the marketplace. Mail surveys sent to a sample of 323 OSB wholesale sheathing buyers in the roof, wall, and floor segments in North America in Fall of 2003 generated a response rate of 22.3 percent (n = 72). The responding wholesale buyers represent 330 million square meters (10-mm thickness basis) of OSB sheathing products purchased in 2002.
As expected in a commodity forest product, survey results indicate that price plays an important role in influencing wholesale buyers' perceived value of OSB sheathing. However, the value derived from low price by the OSB wholesalers is not as important as service and supplier attributes such as on-time delivery and personal relationship with the OSB supplier firm. In addition to the three attributes (delivery time, relationship, and price), packaging (in roof/wall sheathing segments) and brand image (in the floor sheathing segment) also significantly contribute to the value perceptions of responding OSB wholesale sheathing buyers.
Study findings show that the perceived value of an OSB supplier and their sheathing products and services positively affects the volume of OSB purchased from that supplier. In other words, OSB wholesale buyers' largest supplier, accounting for 58 percent of their volume of OSB purchased in 2002, is perceived as their highest valued supplier for OSB sheathing products and services (a calculated value score of 2.4) compared to their second largest supplier (23 percent of OSB purchased in 2002 and a value score of 1.9) and their third largest supplier (accounting for 13 percent of OSB purchased in 2002 and a value score of 1.75).
Adair, C. 2004. Regional production and market outlook: Structural panels and engineered wood products, 2004-2009. APA—The Engineered Wood Association, Tacoma, WA. 56 pp.nAdair, C. 2006. Structural panel and engineered wood year-book. May 2006. APA—The Engineered Wood Association, Tacoma, WA. 44 pp.nAnderson, J. C., and J. A. Narus 1999. Business market management: Understanding, creating, and delivering value. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ. 480 pp.nAnderson, J. C., and J. A. Narus 1994. Flexible market offerings: Naked solutions with options. Institute for the Study of Business Markets, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA. (Report 7-1994), 33 pp.nAnderson, J. C., D. C. Jain, and P. K. Chintagunta 1993. Customer value assessment in business markets: A state-of-practice study. J. Business to Business Marketing. 1(1): 3-29.nAnonymous. 2006 http://www.globalwood.org'>www.globalwood.orgnAPA, The Engineered Wood Association. 2000. Oriented strand board: Product guide. APA, The Engineered Wood Association, Tacoma, WA.nBest, R. J. 2000. Market based management: Strategies for growing customer value and profitability. 2nd ed. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ. 385 pp.nBumgardner, M., and Al Schuler 2002. Engineered wood products and structural panel overview. CINTRAFOR, 19th Annual International Forest Products Marketing Conference, September 26-27, Seattle, WA.nBush, R. J., and S. A. Sinclair 1992. Changing strategies in mature industries: A case study. J. Business and Industrial Marketing 7(4):63-72.nChain Store Guide. 1999. 1999 directory (CD-ROM) of building products and hardlines distributors. Lebhar-Friedman, Business Guides Inc., Tampa, FL.nDamery, D. 2003. OSB prices and industrial consolidation. Building Materials and Wood Technology. University of Massachuttes, Amherst, MA http://www.umass.edu/bmatwt/publications/articles/osb_prices.html'>http://www.umass.edu/bmatwt/publications/articles/osb_prices.htmlnDasmohapatra, S., and P. M. Smith 2005. Perceptions of attributes of oriented strandboard sheathing by wholesalers and manufacturers. Proc. 39th International Wood Composites Symposium and Technical Workshop, Pullman, WA, April 4-7, 2005. Pp. 47-55.nDeSarbo, W., K. Jedidi, and I. Sinha 2001. Customer value analysis in a heterogeneous market. Strategic Management J. 22(9):845-857.nDillman, D. A. 2000. Mail and internet surveys: The tailored design method. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, NY. 464 pp.nEggert, A., and W. Ulaga 2002. Customer perceived value: A substitute for satisfaction in business markets? J. Business and Industrial Marketing 17(2/3):107-118.nFinn, A., and U. Kayande 1997. Reliability assessment and optimization of marketing measurement. J. Marketing Res. 34(May):262-275.nFlint, D. J., and R. B. Woodruff 2001. The initiators of changes in customers' desired value: Results from a theory building study. Industrial Marketing Management 30(4):321-337.nFornell, C., M. D. Johnson, E. W. Anderson, J. Cha, and B. E. Bryant 1996. The American Customer Satisfaction Index: Nature, purpose, and findings. J. Marketing. 60(October):7-18.nGale, B. T. 1994. Managing customer value. The Free Press, New York, NY. 424 pp.nGrewal, D., K. B. Monroe, and R. Krishnan 1998. The effects of price-comparison advertising on buyers' perceptions of acquisition value, transaction value, and behavioral intentions. J. Marketing 62(2):46-59.nGrisaffe, D. B., and A. Kumar 1998. Antecedents and consequences of customer value: Testing an expanded framework. Working Paper (Report No. 98-107), Marketing Science Institute, Cambridge, MA.nHogan, J. E. 2001. Expected relationship value: A construct, a methodology for measurement, and a modeling technique. Industrial Marketing Management 30(4):339-351.nIdassi, J. O., T. M. Young, P. M. Winistorfer, D. M. Ostermeier, and R. B. Woodruff 1994. A customer-oriented marketing method for hardwood lumber companies. Forest Prod. J. 44(7/8):67-73.nKothandaraman, P., and D. T. Wilson 2000. Implementing relationship strategy. Industrial Marketing Management 29(4):339-349.nKotler, P. 1997. Marketing management: Analysis, planning, implementation, and control. 9th ed. Prentice-Hall, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ. 789 pp.nKrueger, P. E. 2001. Determining appropriate sample size Pages 247-258 in: E. I. Farmer and J. W. Rojewski (eds), Research Pathways. University Press of America, Lanham, NJ.nLapierre, J. 2000. Customer perceived value in industrial contexts. J. Business and Industrial Marketing 15(2/3): 122-140.nLemon, K. N., R. T. Rust, and V. A. Zeithaml 2001. What drives customer equity? Marketing Management 10(1): 20-25.nLevin, I. P., and R. D. Johnson 1984. Estimating price-quality tradeoffs using comparative judgments. J. Consumer Research 11(1):593-600.nLevitt, T. 1969. The marketing mode. McGraw Hill, New York, NY. 352 pp.nMenard, S. 2002. Applied logistic regression analysis. 2nd ed. Sage Publications, Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA. 111 pp.nMonroe, K. B. 1990. Pricing: Making profitable decisions. 2nd ed. McGraw Hill, New York, NY. 502 pp.nMorrison, D. P. 2001. B2B Branding: Avoiding the pitfalls. Marketing Management 10(3):30-34.nNaumann, E. 1995. Delivering Customer Value: The path to sustainable competitive advantage. Thomson Executive Press, Cincinnati, OH. 279 pp.nNunnally, J. C., and I. H. Bernstein 1994. Psychometric theory. 3rd ed. McGraw-Hill, New York. 752 pp.nPearl, D., and D. Fairley 1985. Testing for potential for non-response bias in sample surveys. University of Chicago Press. Public Opinion Quart. 49(4):553-560.nPeterson, R. A. 1994. A meta-analysis of Cronbach's co-efficient alpha. J. Consumer Research 21(9):381-391.nRangaswamy, V., H. Gatignon, and D. J. Reibstein 1994. Competitive marketing behavior in industrial markets. J. Marketing 58(2):45-55.nSeward, K. E. 1986. An analysis of brand naming practices implemented by oriented strandboard/waferboard manufacturers. Unpublished Thesis for MS. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA, 132 pp.nSeward, K. E., and Steven A. Sinclair 1988a. An examination of the changing marketing and product policy strategies of North American structural panel producers. Forest Prod. J. 38(3):5-12.nSeward, K. E., and Steven A. Sinclair 1988b. Retailers perceptions of structural panel attributes and market segments. Forest Prod. J. 38(4):25-31.nShipley, D., and P. Howard 1993. Brand naming industrial products. Industrial Marketing Management 22(1):59-66.nShook, S. R., W. R. Turner, and I. L. Eastin 1998. Adoption, diffusion, and substitution of structural wood panels. Center for International Trade in Forest Products (CINTRAFOR), Working paper 65, University of Washington, Seattle, WA.nSinclair, S. A. 1992. Forest Products Marketing. McGraw-Hill, Inc., New York, NY. 403 pp.nSmith, T. M. 2002. Exploring customer value in the hardwood lumber industry. Wood Fiber Sci. 34(1):2-13.nSPSS. 1999. SPSS Base 10.0 Applications Guide. SPSS, Inc., Chicago, IL. 577 pp.nStructural Board Association. 1998-2002. OSB Guide: Complete Guide to Oriented Strand Board. URL: wysiwyg://14/ http://www.sba-osb.com/sba/sba.osb.info/sba.osbinfo.1.ht'>http://www.sba-osb.com/sba/sba.osb.info/sba.osbinfo.1.htnTreacy, M., and F. Wiersema 1995. The discipline of market leaders. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA. 208 pp.nWeinstein, A., and W. C. Johnson 1999. Designing and delivering superior customer value. CRC Press LL, Boca Raton, Florida. 388 pp.nWilson, D. T. 1995. An integrated model of buyer-seller relationships. J. Academy of Marketing Sci. 23(4):335-345.nWinfurter, S., and E. N. Hansen 1999. Softwood lumber quality requirements: Examining the supplier/buyer perception gap. Wood Fiber Sci. 31(1): 83-94.nWoodruff, R. B. 1997. Customer value: The next source of competitive advantage. J. Academy of Marketing Science 25(2):139-153.nWoodruff, R. B., and S. F. Gardial 1996. Know your customer: New approaches to customer value and satisfaction. Blackwell Publishers, Cambridge, MA. 338 pp.nZeithaml, V. A. 1988. Consumer perceptions of price, quality, and value: A means-end model and synthesis of evidence. J. Marketing 52(July):2-22.n
The copyright of an article published in Wood and Fiber Science is transferred to the Society of Wood Science and Technology (for U. S. Government employees: to the extent transferable), effective if and when the article is accepted for publication. This transfer grants the Society of Wood Science and Technology permission to republish all or any part of the article in any form, e.g., reprints for sale, microfiche, proceedings, etc. However, the authors reserve the following as set forth in the Copyright Law:
1. All proprietary rights other than copyright, such as patent rights.
2. The right to grant or refuse permission to third parties to republish all or part of the article or translations thereof. In the case of whole articles, such third parties must obtain Society of Wood Science and Technology written permission as well. However, the Society may grant rights with respect to Journal issues as a whole.
3. The right to use all or part of this article in future works of their own, such as lectures, press releases, reviews, text books, or reprint books.