INSTRODUCTION

Customers exchange information and experience about the goods and services and
this has been long area of attractiveness for the investigators (researchers) in order
to know how such form of interpersonal communication influences buying behavior
of the consumers (Johnson, Zinkhan & Ayala, 1998). Therefore WORD OF MOUTH
has been a continuous tagline in the marketing research for many years (Garnefeld,
Helm & Eggert, 2011; Sderlund & Rosengren, 2007). Since the receivers
perception about word of mouth is neutral so their advices are considered as more
valid and true (Silverman, 2011; see also Sweeney, Soutar & Mazzarol, 2008; Wang,
2011). Even the marketers in the recent time had invented that positive word of
mouth as a strong tool to capture new customers (Ahrens, Coyle & Strahilevitz,
2013; Gremler, Gwinner & Brown, 2001; Sweeney, Soutar & Mazzarol, 2012).

In research paper (Anderson 1998, p. 6), WOM is described as the informal

communication between two individuals concerning at evaluation of goods and
service. According to Sweeney, Soutar and Mazzarol (2008), WOM even refers to a
process of a senders interpersonal impact on the message receiver. While the
majority of researchers have clearly indicated the impact of the advice which
sender gives their WOM understanding (e.g. Maxham & Netemeyer, 2002; Niu &
Messinger, 2011; Stokes, Syed & Lomax, 2002).

In the current business scenario, many organizations not only depend upon positive
word of mouth to acquire new potential customers but they have also introduced
REFERRAL PROGRAMS as an effective tool to gain new customers and also to tackle
the potential of WOM communication (e.g. Buttle, 1998; Garnefeld, Helm & Eggert,
2011; Hogan, Lemon & Libai, 2004; Kumar, Petersen & Leone, 2010; Niu &
Messinger, 2011; Wirtz et al., 2013). In such a campaign, customers are usually
rewarded for recommending the firm and its product and services to other potential
customers who are directly or indirectly related to him/her (e.g. Schmitt, Skiera &
Van den Bulte, 2011; Wirtz et al., 2013). Such type of campaign is generally
controlled by the providers (Schmitt, Skiera & Van den Bulte, 2011).
Literature review

Several studies had been conducted in the past which mainly focused on why
customers spread word about the product or service which it consumes by
evaluating different factors which sets off WOM communication. Many of these
researches concentrate on the impact of quality relationship on customer referrals.
Specifically, customer satisfaction and loyalty, as well as commitment and trust
were the main drivers of WOM (cf. De Matos & Rossi, 2008).

With regards to important factors that influences the WOM, customer satisfaction
has got the most recognition in the past (e.g. Anderson, 1998; Athanassopoulos,
Gounaris & Stathakopoulos, 2001; Bone, 1992; Bowman & Narayandas, 2001;
Brown et al., 2005; Naylor & Kleiser, 2000; Ranaweera & Prabhu, 2003; Swan &
Oliver, 1989; Wangenheim & Bayn, 2007).Satisfaction refers to the state that takes
place after the consumption related fulfillment (Oliver, 1997). Anderson (1998, p. 6)
pointed out that individuals satisfaction with consumption experience is generally
regarded as the key to product-related word of mouth. There are several studies
that were conducted to support this particular statement (Gremler, Gwinner &
Brown, 2001; Heitmann, Lehmann & Herrmann, 2007; Hennig -Thurau, Gwinner &
Gremler, 2002; Jones & Reynolds, 2006; Lee & Jaafar, 2011; Macintosh, 2007;
Mangold, Miller & Brockway, 1999; Mittal, Kumar & Tsiros, 1999; Price & Arnould,
1999; Ranaweera & Prabhu, 2003; Sderlund, 2006; Swan & Oliver, 1989; Verhoef,
Franses & Hoekstra, 2002; Wangenheim & Bayn, 2007; Wirtz & Chew, 2002). In
numerical terms meta-analysis with 162 samples, De Matos and Rossi (2008) also
found support for a direct effect of customer satisfaction on WOM activity.

The theory given by De Matos & Rossi (2008) specifies that consumers compare
their post-purchase evaluations with their expectations prior to usage. The degree
to which the performance exceeds expectations would motivate customers to
spread positive WOM, i.e. to talk to others about their positive experience.

Although marketing researchers predominantly agree that customer satisfaction is

positively linked to customer referrals, the functional form of the relationship is
disputed (Mazzarol, Sweeney & Soutar, 2007; Wangenheim & Bayn, 2007;
Garnefeld, 2008). Also, there is proof to the fact that satisfied customers do not
always provide positive WOM communication (e.g. Naylor, 1999). De Matos and
Rossi (2008, p. 592) therefore conclude that the managers should concentate on
increasing the customers likelihood of favorable recommendations through
increase customers commitment.

Based on the previous findings of Bettencourt (1997), Brown et al. (2005), Eggert
and Helm (2000), and Hennig-Thurau, Gwinner and Gremler (2002)it can be
observed that consumers commitment at least partial in level and moderates the
influnces the satisfaction on providing positive WOM. On the other side of it, since
the commitment is driven from satisfaction (e.g. Hennig-Thurau, Gwinner &
Gremler, 2002), higher the level of customer satisfaction higher the level of
commitment will be which positively affects the referral making (Brown et al. 2005).
It was also profounded that connection between WOM and satisfaction was found to
be weaker for strongly commited customers i.e. highly commited customers used to
advice irrespective of their level of satisfaction on contrary to it less commited
customers tends to depend on their level of satisfaction (Brown et al., 2005; De
Matos & Rossi, 2008).

Recent papers had also emphased on the Managed Supplier Means in terms of
reference rewards
Are effective in promoting the behavior of Provide advice on how to design the
Structure of reference reward programs. Therefore, Incentives serve as additional
factors for WOM activity. However, the influence of Recommend depends on border
Conditions. Building on the results Wirtz and Chew (2002) and Ryu and Feick (2007),
the model integrates satisfaction and equality Force as moderators of the
relationship Between recommendation rewards and recommendation behavior.

Although satisfaction has a positive influence on the effect of incentives on WOM

activity, the strength of the tie serves as a negative moderator. Rewards should
therefore be more likely for satisfied customers. On the other hand, incentives
increase the likelihood of recommending more for weak ties than strong ties
because clients are less worried about the potential social risk by giving rewarded
referrals to low equality relationships
(Ryu and Feick, 2007).

This contradicts the results of Wirtz et al. (2013), who found that at least small
rewards improve the willingness to refer for strong ties, although they recognize
that giving rewarded references to close ties can sometimes be more risky. The
contradictory results could be explained by the different types of rewards used in
the two studies.

The initial empirical results of Eggert, Helm and Garnefeld (2007), Garnefeld, Helm
and Eggert (2011) and Garnefeld et al. (2013) show that giving the adolescent
improves the attitude of the respondents and their loyalty to the provider
recommended, because clients refer to their behavior as a reference that they feel
attached to the company.

The expertise of customers in the service category and their experience with the
recommended supplier moderates negatively the impact, ie the impact on the
shipper of the WOM offer is stronger for the Consumers with lower levels of
expertise and experience. Garnefeld, Helm and Eggert (2011) argue that these
customers are more likely to derive their own attitudes towards the intended
supplier from their behavior.

According to Sweeney, Soutar and Mazzarol (2008), WOM references are more
appreciated and appreciated when they are sought by the beneficiaries themselves.
Verlegh et al. (2013) request Research on the interaction of disclosure with different
reward systems and types of incentives. Existing studies have revealed
contradictory results. Tuk et al. (2009) concluded that the negative impact of
incentives could be reduced by disclosing the economic motive, while Verlegh et al.
(2013) found that the disclosure evoked less positive responses. According to Tuk et
al. (2009), recipients realize that when the recommenders reveal that they are
rewarded. Due to their honesty, beneficiaries will not interpret the dismissal as
motivated by self interest, but by the enthusiasm of the product. Wangenheim and
Bayn (2007) contribute to this research gap by analyzing the path from evaluator
satisfaction to acquiring a new client. In this regard, specialists could draw attention
to the special role of WOM online.