Journal of Marketing Management

ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: www.tandfonline.com/journals/rjmm20

Influences of omnichannel integration and value

congruence on customer patronage: the flow
theory perspective

Lin Liu, Yang Li, Hefu Liu & Zhengzhi Guan

To cite this article: Lin Liu, Yang Li, Hefu Liu & Zhengzhi Guan (2024) Influences
of omnichannel integration and value congruence on customer patronage: the
flow theory perspective, Journal of Marketing Management, 40:1-2, 151-182, DOI:
10.1080/0267257X.2023.2279142

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/0267257X.2023.2279142

Published online: 08 Nov 2023.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 234

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rjmm20
JOURNAL OF MARKETING MANAGEMENT
2024, VOL. 40, NOS. 1–2, 151–182
https://doi.org/10.1080/0267257X.2023.2279142

Influences of omnichannel integration and value congruence

on customer patronage: the flow theory perspective
a b
Lin Liu , Yang Li , Hefu Liua and Zhengzhi Guanc
a
School of Management, University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei, Anhui, China; bSchool of
Management, Hefei University of Technology, Hefei, Anhui, China; cFaculty of Business and Management,
Beijing Normal University-Hong Kong Baptist University United International College, Zhuhai, Guangdong,
China

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

Omnichannel retailers face the elusive challenge of maintaining Received 28 December 2021
customer patronage in the current competitive business environ­ Accepted 23 September 2023
ment. Drawing upon the flow theory and literature on omnichannel KEYWORDS
integration, this study investigated how different types of omnichan­ Omnichannel retailing;
nel integration (i.e. informational, transactional, and relational inte­ omnichannel integration;
gration) influence customer patronage through the flow experience. customer patronage; flow
Additionally, this study examined the potential moderating role of theory; value congruence
retailer-customer value congruence in the impact of omnichannel
integration. We collected survey data from 292 omnichannel custo­
mers to test our research model. The results showed that the flow
experience mediated the positive effects of transactional integration
and relational integration on customer patronage. Additionally, value
congruence positively moderated the effects of informational inte­
gration and relational integration on the flow experience. The impli­
cations and limitations of this study are further discussed.

Introduction
Omnichannel retailing, referring to the synergetic management of all available channels
or touchpoints to provide seamless shopping experiences for customers (Cao & Li, 2015;
Cocco & Demoulin, 2022; Verhoef et al., 2015), has become an important driver of global
retail sales. An industry survey report estimates that global omnichannel marketing
accounted for USD 8 billion in 2022 and is expected to reach USD 14.6 billion by 2026,
with a compound annual growth rate of 16.4% (ReporterLinker, 2022). Given the promis­
ing prospects of omnichannel marketing, it is crucial for omnichannel retailers to imple­
ment effective omnichannel strategies to foster customer patronage, which reflects
customers’ willingness to maintain close and enduring relationships with omnichannel
retailers (Baker et al., 2002; Blut et al., 2018; Emrich et al., 2015).
Existing research on omnichannel retailing has yielded substantial evidence regard­
ing the significance of omnichannel integration in promoting customer patronage
(Boden et al., 2020; Emrich & Verhoef, 2015). However, the current understanding of
the mediating mechanisms that link omnichannel integration and customer patronage

CONTACT Yang Li yangli@hfut.edu.cn School of Management, Hefei University of Technology, Tunxi Road 193,
Hefei, Anhui 230002, China
© 2023 Westburn Publishers Ltd.
152 L. LIU ET AL.

remains limited. It is widely acknowledged that the primary goal of omnichannel

integration is to eliminate barriers across different channels and enable customers to
fully immerse themselves in the shopping process (Kumar et al., 2019; Rodríguez-
Torrico et al., 2020; Shi, 2020). Such experiences can be explicitly captured by the
concept of flow experience, which encompasses a holistic sensation of deep involve­
ment and focused attention (Csikszentmihalyi & Larson, 2014). Flow, as a self-
reinforcing optimal experience, has been shown to contribute to a wide range of
favourable customer-related outcomes, including customer patronage (Ameen et al.,
2020; Roy et al., 2020). Therefore, this study identifies the flow experience as a vital
mediator in elucidating the impact of omnichannel integration on customer
patronage.
Furthermore, we propose that the generation of flow experiences through omnichan­
nel integration is contingent upon the retailer-customer value congruence, which refers
to the alignment between the values held by retailers and customers (Elsharnouby et al.,
2023; Zhang & Bloemer, 2008). Previous research has primarily focused on the boundary
conditions of omnichannel integration from either a retailer-centric or customer-centric
perspective (Hossain et al., 2020; Li et al., 2018), largely overlooking the moderating role of
retailer-customer congruence, particularly in terms of value congruence. Given that
personal values reflect individuals’ fundamental beliefs about what is desirable, customers
tend to respond favourably to retailers whose values resonate with their own (Edwards &
Cable, 2009). In this regard, customers are more likely to recognise and appreciate the
omnichannel integration provided by retailers who share their values, resulting in
increased attention and active engagement in the shopping process (Shokri & Alavi,
2019; van Schie et al., 2018). Conversely, customers with a low level of value congruence
with retailers may exhibit reduced interest in the information or services provided, leading
to diminished effectiveness of omnichannel integration in enhancing customer experi­
ences. Accordingly, when faced with omnichannel integration, customers with a high-
level value congruence are more inclined to derive benefits from it and experience
a greater state of flow.
Overall, this study aims to empirically examine how omnichannel integration influ­
ences customer patronage through the flow experience, with retailer-customer value
congruence serving as the boundary condition for omnichannel integration.
Additionally, to gain a more nuanced understanding of the impact of omnichannel
integration, this study distinguishes three distinct types of omnichannel integration:
informational integration, transactional integration, and relational integration. By analys­
ing survey data collected from a sample of 292 omnichannel customers, we found strong
support for our proposed research model.
Our work is expected to contribute to omnichannel literature and flow theory in several
ways. First, by emphasising the mediating role of the flow experience, our study enriches
our understanding of how omnichannel integration influences customer patronage.
Second, our study expands the boundary conditions of omnichannel integration by
revealing the moderating role of retailer-customer value congruence. Third, this study
advances flow theory by contextualising it within the specific context of omnichannel
retailing. Practically, our study offers valuable insights to omnichannel retailers on how to
effectively leverage omnichannel integration and value propositions to promote custo­
mer patronage.
 JOURNAL OF MARKETING MANAGEMENT 153

Literature review
Omnichannel integration
Omnichannel integration refers to the degree to which a firm strategically designs,
manages, coordinates, and operationalises all available channels to create synergies and
enhance customer experiences (Cao & Li, 2015; Cocco & Demoulin, 2022; Neslin, 2022). By
implementing omnichannel integration, omnichannel retailers can integrate various
channels or touchpoints into a cohesive system and deliver seamless shopping experi­
ences to customers across channels (Cao & Li, 2015; Rodríguez-Torrico et al., 2020). In
recent years, we have witnessed a growing body of research investigating the impact of
omnichannel integration on customer behaviours. Table 1 presents a summary of key
previous studies in this area, alongside our study, which is developed based on
a thorough review of these existing works.
First, while there is sufficient empirical evidence demonstrating the positive impact of
omnichannel integration on customer patronage, the underlying mediating mechanisms
behind this effect remain incompletely understood. For instance, Boden et al. (2020)
found that the implementation of electronic shelf labels, which integrate price and
product information across channels, can significantly boost customer patronage. Song
et al. (2020) found that the ‘buy online, pickup in-store’ service increases customers’
purchase frequency and amount towards an omnichannel retailer. However, only
a limited number of studies have explored the mediating factors through which omni­
channel integration influences customer patronage, primarily focusing on customers’
interactions with omnichannel retailers, such as customer engagement (Lee et al., 2019)
and customer empowerment (Zhang et al., 2018). Given the significant emphasis on
enhancing customer experiences in omnichannel research (Gao et al., 2021; Shen et al.,
2018), it is crucial to explore whether omnichannel integration can effectively enable
customers to become deeply involved in the shopping process, ultimately promoting
customer patronage.
Second, despite the substantial attention given to the boundary conditions of
omnichannel integration, there remains a dearth of knowledge regarding the moderat­
ing role of retailer-customer congruence in the impact of omnichannel integration.
Specifically, previous studies on omnichannel integration have mainly investigated
the moderating effects of customer-related or retailer-related factors. For instance,
Herhausen et al. (2015) showed that customers’ Internet shopping experiences can
moderate the effect of omnichannel integration on customers’ perceived service quality
and the risk of online stores. Li et al. (2018) found that showrooming can decrease the
negative effect of channel integration on retailer uncertainty. Given that the success of
omnichannel retailing hinges upon the strong bonds established between retailers and
customers (Cao & Li, 2015; Verhoef et al., 2015), it is expected that the congruence
between retailers and customers would play a pivotal role in amplifying the effect of
omnichannel integration.
Third, previous studies have highlighted the importance of examining the distinct
aspects of omnichannel integration due to its complex and multifaceted nature (Ma
et al., 2023; Oh & Teo, 2010; Saghiri et al., 2017). Within the omnichannel literature, three
common types of omnichannel integration have been identified: informational
 154

Table 1. Research on omnichannel integration and customer behaviour.

Studies Omnichannel integration Customer behavior Mediator Moderator
Bendoly et al. (2005) Channel integration Customer retention NA NA
Oh and Teo (2010) Integrated promotion information, Consumer value Information quality, service convenience NA
integrated product and pricing
L. LIU ET AL.

information, integrated transaction

information, integrated information
access, integrated order fulfillment,
integrated customer service
Herhausen et al. (2015) Channel integration Search intention, purchase intention, Perceived service quality of the Internet store, Internet shopping
willingness to pay perceived risk of the Internet store experience
Emrich et al. (2015) Channel integration, assortment structure Patronage intention Perceived variety, perceived risk, perceived NA
convenience
Emrich and Verhoef Cross-channel homogenous and Patronage intention NA Cognitive shopping
(2015) prototypical store design orientation, processing
intensity
Frasquet and Miquel Channel integration Offline loyalty, online loyalty Overall satisfaction NA
(2017)
Zhang et al. (2018) Channel integration Patronage intention Consumer empowerment, trust, satisfaction NA
Shen et al. (2018) Service configuration quality, channel Omnichannel service usage Perceived fluency Internal usage experience,
integration quality external usage
experience
Li et al. (2018) Channel integration Customer retention, interest in Retailer uncertainty, identity attractiveness, Showrooming
alternatives switching costs
Lee et al. (2019) Channel integration quality Repurchase intention, positive WOM Customer engagement NA
Hossain et al. (2020) Channel integration quality Perceived value Cross-buying intentions NA
Yang et al. (2020) Informational channel integration Platform use intention Perceived benefit, perceived risk, perceived Cognitive effort
ease, perceived usefulness, perceived value,
attitude
Boden et al. (2020) Integrated price and product information Revenue, visitor NA NA
Song et al. (2020) Buy online, pickup in-store service Online purchase frequency and Offline store density,
amount, offline purchase frequency product variety in pick-
and amount up store, store
competition intensity
Sun et al. (2020) Channel integration quality Omnichannel service usage Omnichannel satisfaction, omnichannel habit, NA
omnichannel self-efficacy
(Continued)
Table 1. (Continued).
Studies Omnichannel integration Customer behavior Mediator Moderator
Swoboda and Winters Perceived offline-to-online services, Purchase intention Perceived quality of offline offerings, perceived Consumers’ online
(2021) perceived online-to-offline services quality of online offerings shopping experience,
perceived channel
congruence
Gao et al. (2021) Channel integration Omnichannel usage intention Cognitive customer experience, affective NA
customer experience
Cocco Channel integration Customer engagement, retailer Seamless shopping journey NA
and Demoulin (2022) switching, basket size
Ma et al. (2023) Informational channel integration, Online loyalty Perceived online channel usefulness, perceived NA
fulfillment channel integration online channel risk
Lin et al. (2023) Channel integration quality Stickiness Relationship commitment, trust NA
Li et al. (2023) Transactional integration, relational Face-to-face WOM, online store WOM, Perceived personal preference fit, perceived NA
integration social media WOM social relatedness
This study Informational integration, transactional Customer patronage Flow experience Value congruence
integration, relational integration
JOURNAL OF MARKETING MANAGEMENT
155
156 L. LIU ET AL.

integration, transactional integration, and relational integration (Li et al., 2023; Ma et al.,
2023). Informational integration focuses on ensuring consistent retail information and
providing flexible information access to customers across different channels (Bendoly
et al., 2005; Herhausen et al., 2015). For instance, customers can access consistent offline
store information, such as promotional details, product availability, and store locations,
through the online store. Informational integration enhances information quality across
channels, reducing customers’ perceived uncertainty and opportunistic motivations
(Boden et al., 2020; Li et al., 2018). Transactional integration involves enabling customers
to complete transactions through their preferred channel (Bendoly et al., 2005; Oh &
Teo, 2010). For instance, retailers may offer in-store exchange or repair services for
products purchased online. Transactional integration empowers customers to choose
the most convenient channel for their purchases (Bell et al., 2014; Song et al., 2020).
Lastly, relational integration pertains to personalised interactions with each customer
based on integrated customer profiles gathered from different channels (Oh & Teo,
2010). For instance, retailers provide consistent member-owned products and services
(e.g. special offerings, tiers, points, and rewards) across different channels. Relational
integration enables retailers to better cater to customer preferences and foster strong
customer relationships (Banerjee, 2014). Given the functional distinctions among infor­
mational, transactional, and relational integration, it is vital to examine their individual
roles within a unified research framework.

Flow theory
Flow refers to an optimal experience in which individuals become deeply absorbed in an
activity and nothing else seems to matter (Csikszentmihalyi, 1975, 1990). When experien­
cing a strong flow state, individuals become fully engrossed in the activity, losing self-
awareness, irrelevant thoughts, and any sense of the passing of time (Hoffman & Novak,
1996). The concept of flow has been applied to various specific contexts, such as online
shopping (Zanjani et al., 2016), brand communities (Lin et al., 2019), smart technologies
(Javornik, 2016), and gamification (Hwang & Choi, 2020). Generally, it has been proposed
that five dimensions collectively reflect the flow experience: perceived curiosity (the
heightened arousal of cognitive and sensory curiosity); perceived control (the perception
of being in control over the activity); heightened enjoyment (the intrinsic pleasure from
the activity); focused immersion (the experience of focused attention where other atten­
tional demands are ignored); and temporal dissociation (the inability to perceive the
passage of time during the activity) (Agarwal & Karahanna, 2000). This study utilises these
dimensions to capture customers’ flow experiences in the shopping process in omnichan­
nel retailing.
A large body of research has acknowledged the significance of flow experiences in
fostering positive customer attitudes and behaviours. For instance, Berger et al. (2018)
demonstrated that flow experiences generated by gamified interactions can enhance
customers’ cognitive and affective engagement and strengthen their connection with the
brand. Notably, flow is a self-reinforcing experience, as individuals actively strive to
maintain or intensify it voluntarily (Nakamura & Csikszentmihalyi, 2002). In the context
of omnichannel retailing, the flow experience has been identified as a valuable predictor
 JOURNAL OF MARKETING MANAGEMENT 157

of customers’ continued purchases of specific omnichannel retailers (Ameen et al., 2020;

Quach et al., 2020).
The desirable outcomes of flow experiences have led many researchers to investigate
the factors that facilitate such experiences. Csikszentmihalyi (1975) initially proposed that
the flow experience is more likely to occur when individuals perceive the challenges of
activities are commensurate with their perceived skills for actions. Guo and Poole (2009)
elaborated on three theoretical preconditions for flow: a clear goal, a fast and unambig­
uous feedback mechanism, and perceived balances of challenge and skill. Empirically,
they found that these preconditions can explain how website complexity affected the
flow experience. More recently, there has been a growing body of research that con­
textualises the antecedents of flow within specific environmental characteristics in differ­
ent contexts. For instance, Lin et al. (2019) identified community cohesiveness and
information quality as primary antecedents of the flow experience in brand communities.
Regarding omnichannel retailing, Ameen et al. (2020) proposed that both the physical
environment (e.g. diversity, luxury, aesthetics, comfort, and convenience) and virtual
environment (e.g. interaction design, personalisation, trust, privacy, consumer peer inter­
action, and relationship commitment) can significantly influence the generation of flow.
However, there is still a limited understanding of how flow experiences can be effectively
cultivated within specific omnichannel settings, such as omnichannel integration.
Furthermore, the generation of flow experiences in specific environmental settings is
closely tied to the presence of individuals. According to the flow theory, the generation of
flow experiences is sensitive to the individual’s preference for the external environment,
suggesting that different individuals may experience varying levels of flow when exposed
to the same external stimuli (Csikszentmihalyi & Larson, 2014). Since individuals are more
likely to be actively engaged in an environment that aligns with their personal prefer­
ences (Csikszentmihalyi & Larson, 2014; Guo et al., 2016), personal values, which convey
the desirable goal in daily lives, play an important role in the emergence of flow
experiences. For instance, Zhang et al. (2014) suggested that individuals were more likely
to experience flow in environments that resonated with their own values. On the other
hand, while extant studies have shown that personal characteristics can influence the
impacts of the external environment on flow experiences, the role of congruence
between self and external entities should be further explored in the flow study. Based
on the flow theory, Yim et al. (2012) emphasised the congruence of perceived efficacy
between customers and service employees and found that customers derive the highest
level of enjoyment when both they and the service employees have a high level of
efficacy in the service process. Accordingly, the extent to which environmental settings
generate flow experiences may depend on the congruence between values propositions
behind these settings and individuals’ values.

Value congruence
Personal values are fundamental and enduring beliefs that reflect individuals’ preferences
and what is desirable in their daily lives (Edwards & Cable, 2009; Posner, 2010). These
values serve as core beliefs and form the basis for evaluating judgements, attitudes, and
choices (Shokri & Alavi, 2019; Weber, 2015). When individuals encounter the value
propositions of other entities, such as organisations and retailers, they may tend to assess
158 L. LIU ET AL.

the level of congruence between these values and their personal values. This assessment
can be captured by the concept of value congruence, which refers to the similarity or
alignment between the values held by individuals and those of other entities (Edwards &
Cable, 2009; Maxham & Netemeyer, 2003). In customer-retailer relationships, customers
tend to prefer interacting with retailers whose value propositions resonate with their
personal values (Baker et al., 2014; Maxham & Netemeyer, 2003; Zhang & Bloemer, 2011).
A considerable body of evidence has shown that customers’ perception of the congru­
ence between their values and retailers’ or brands’ values are positively associated with
various desirable outcomes, such as customers’ affective commitment (Zhang & Bloemer,
2011), brand identification and relationship quality (He et al., 2018), and brand attractive­
ness (Elbedweihy et al., 2016).
In the context of omnichannel retailing, omnichannel retailers consciously or uncon­
sciously convey their value propositions to customers through a variety of channels
(Saghiri et al., 2017; Verhoef et al., 2015). When there is a high level of value con­
gruence between customers and omnichannel retailers, customers are more likely to
appreciate the efforts invested by the retailers in implementing omnichannel strate­
gies aimed at enhancing customer experiences across channels, such as omnichannel
integration (Kim & Kim, 2012; Zhao et al., 2022). As a result, customers who share
congruent values with omnichannel retailers are likely to derive greater benefits from
the omnichannel integration and exhibit higher levels of engagement in the shopping
process.

Hypotheses development
This study proposes a research framework that elucidates how different types of omni­
channel integration (i.e. informational, transactional, and relational integration) foster
customer patronage through the cultivation of the flow experience. Additionally, we
explore the moderating role of retailer-customer value congruence in the effect of
omnichannel integration on the flow experience. Our research model is shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1. Research model.

 JOURNAL OF MARKETING MANAGEMENT 159

Omnichannel integration and flow experience

Informational integration involves coordinating retail information from different channels
to enhance the overall information quality (Bendoly et al., 2005; Oh & Teo, 2010). By
ensuring consistent retail information across different channels, informational integration
reduces information conflict across different channels and prevents cognitive disruptions
arising from inconsistent information (Lee et al., 2019; Rodríguez-Torrico et al., 2020). As
a consequence, customers are likely to be deeply involved in the shopping process when
presented with consistent information across channels (Cocco & Demoulin, 2022). By
contrast, managing different channels independently can result in information inconsis­
tencies (Saghiri et al., 2017), which may raise customers’ concerns about the quality of
products or services offered by omnichannel retailers (Li et al., 2020; Melis et al., 2016).
Moreover, customers may become distracted by comparing information discrepancies
between different channels in search of better deals (Boden et al., 2020). For instance,
inconsistencies in product prices between online and offline channels may prompt
customers to constantly check online product information while shopping at physical
stores of a particular omnichannel retailer, thereby diverting their focus from the actual
product or service.
Furthermore, as flow theory suggests, individuals are more likely to concentrate on an
activity when they have a clear goal in mind (Csikszentmihalyi & Larson, 2014). In the
context of omnichannel retailing, consistent retail information across channels helps
customers better understand their shopping needs, enabling them to pursue their goals
with greater attentiveness and ease (Boden et al., 2020). For example, when customers
visit a physical store after browsing online, consistent product information allows them to
comprehend product attributes and focus on their preferred items effortlessly.
Conversely, encountering fragmented and inconsistent product information in the phy­
sical store, compared to the online store, may cause discomfort and hinder the deep
engagement of customers in the shopping process. Moreover, informational integration,
combined with the advantages of various channels, can provide more comprehensive
product information (Herhausen et al., 2015), thereby igniting customers’ enthusiasm to
explore and experience these products. Based on the aforementioned reasons and argu­
ments, we expected that informational integration could generate a flow experience in
omnichannel retailing. Therefore, we propose the following hypothesis:

H1a: Informational integration is positively related to the flow experience.

Transactional integration aims to streamline the fragmented functions of different chan­

nels to provide customers with flexible transaction processing procedures (Bell et al.,
2014; Bendoly et al., 2005). In this study, we assumed that transactional integration
enhances customer experiences by enhancing psychological security. By reducing shop­
ping hassles associated with the limitations of single channels, transactional integration
significantly improves service convenience (Oh & Teo, 2010). As a result, customers may
feel inspired and enthusiastic to actively participate in the shopping process, free from
unnecessary worries or concerns. For example, the service of ‘buy online, pickup in-store’
can alleviate product inventory restrictions and allow customers to complete transactions
at their preferred time and location (Serkan Akturk et al., 2018). Such convenience
160 L. LIU ET AL.

provides customers with a sense of control over the transactional process. When custo­
mers realise that a transaction can be completed with minimal effort, they are more likely
to actively immerse themselves in the experience and derive heightened enjoyment
from it.
Additionally, transactional integration leverages the resources of different chan­
nels to provide customers with a seamless and attentive service. Oh and Teo (2010)
suggested that retailers who have integrated transactional processes are better
equipped to meet customers’ needs. Therefore, transactional integration may offer
a favourable condition for customers to become deeply involved in the shopping
process. Moreover, previous studies have highlighted the importance of delivering
prompt and responsive feedback to customers during the service encounter to
facilitate flow experiences (Yim et al., 2012). Transactional integration is specifically
designed to assist customers in completing their purchases by providing effective
feedback across channels. This, in turn, may enhance customer confidence in the
transaction process and enable them to concentrate on the shopping process (Gao
& Su, 2017). Therefore, we have the following hypothesis:

H1b: Transactional integration is positively related to the flow experience.

Relational integration aims to provide personalised interactions for each customer

by collecting and managing their profiles across all available channels
(Jayachandran et al., 2005; Oh & Teo, 2010). By developing comprehensive custo­
mer data from various channels, relational integration enables retailers to gain
a better understanding of customers’ needs. This understanding is beneficial for
providing customers with seamless experiences on any available channel (Cocco &
Demoulin, 2022; Cui et al., 2021). Additionally, relational integration enhances
customers’ sense of personal attention and fosters their willingness to establish
long-term relationships with retailers (Li et al., 2020; Payne & Frow, 2006). In this
sense, relational integration may encourage customers to invest more of their
resources in the retailer as a form of reciprocity (Lee et al., 2019). Consequently,
customers are further incentivised to concentrate on their shopping activities (Yim
et al., 2012).
Furthermore, relational integration increases retailers’ ability to provide persona­
lised interactions with customers and cater to their specific preferences. This persona­
lised service has the potential to capture customer interest and immerse them in the
shopping process (Schreiner et al., 2019). For instance, when offline stores offer
personalised recommendations based on customers’ historical preferences gathered
from other channels (e.g. prior integrated history, orders, and wish lists), customers can
smoothly engage in the process of searching for their favourite products or services.
Besides, relational integration serves as a signal to customers that the retailer is
actively striving to meet customers’ personalised needs and enhance their omnichan­
nel experience. This signalling effect may significantly increase customers’ willingness
to devote their attention to the shopping experience (Trenz et al., 2020). Therefore, we
have the following hypothesis:

H1c: Relational integration is positively related to the flow experience.

 JOURNAL OF MARKETING MANAGEMENT 161

The moderating role of value congruence

When retailers’ value propositions align with customers’ personal values, the ben­
efits of omnichannel integration are more likely to be perceived and recognised by
customers (Edwards & Cable, 2009; He et al., 2018). With a high level of value
congruence between omnichannel retailers and customers, customers may actively
search for and process information about products or services offered by these
retailers (Kim & Kim, 2012; Shokri & Alavi, 2019). As a consequence, customers are
likely to concentrate more on the shopping process when they encounter consis­
tent information across different channels with the support of informational inte­
gration. Besides, value congruence may improve customers’ perception of the
usefulness of informational integration in reducing information inconsistency or
conflict across channels, thereby increasing their willingness to deeply engage in
the shopping process (Ma et al., 2023; Zhao et al., 2022). On the contrary, with
a low-level value congruence, customers may pay limited attention to the inte­
grated retail information provided by omnichannel retailers. Moreover, according
to the similarity-attraction paradigm, customers are naturally drawn to retailers
whose values align with their own (Cable & Judge, 1997; Elbedweihy et al.,
2016). In this regard, customers are likely to be more interested in consistent
product or service information across different channels provided by retailers that
share their values. This alignment of values may further enhance the impact of
informational integration on the generation of flow experiences. Therefore, we
proposed the following hypothesis:

H2a: Value congruence positively moderates the effect of informational integration on the
flow experience.

With a high level of value congruence, customers are inclined to place greater trust in the
integrated transactional services offered by retailers. This increased trust arises from
customers’ confidence in the service quality of transactional integration provided by
omnichannel retailers whose value propositions align with their values (Cazier et al.,
2007; Lee et al., 2017). Additionally, customers tend to perceive services related to
transactional integration as more credible (Cheng et al., 2019), thereby alleviating con­
cerns about uncertainties associated with completing cross-channel transactions. In con­
trast, with a low-level value congruence, customers may perceive the transactional
integration offered by an omnichannel retailer as unreliable and consider it an unneces­
sary burden in terms of costs. Consequently, customers may exhibit decreased accep­
tance of cross-channel services, leading to a decrease in the effectiveness of transactional
integration (Gao & Su, 2017; Oh & Teo, 2010; Zhang et al., 2018). As such, the stronger the
alignment between an omnichannel retailer’s value propositions and customers’ personal
values, the more likely it is that customers will experience a state of flow from the
transactional integration provided by this retailer. Building on the aforementioned dis­
cussion, we have the following hypothesis:

H2b: Value congruence positively moderates the effect of transactional integration on the
flow experience.
162 L. LIU ET AL.

Customers typically exhibit a stronger commitment to omnichannel retailers who share

congruent values with them, resulting in the allocation of more personal resources, such
as time and energy, in the interactions with these retailers (Wang & Zhang, 2017; Zhang &
Bloemer, 2011). As a consequence, customers may develop a strong sense of belonging
towards these omnichannel retailers and embrace the relational integration provided by
these retailers (Agag, 2019; Tremblay, 2020). This sense of belonging can enhance
customers’ attitudes towards relational integration and increase their engagement in
shopping activities. Additionally, Emrich and Verhoef (2015) proposed that satisfying
customers’ preferences can optimise their responses to omnichannel integration. With
a high-level value congruence, customers are more inclined to appreciate retailers’ efforts
in customer relationship management across channels, which may lead to customers’
actively interacting with omnichannel retailers and becoming more deeply involved in the
shopping process (Elbedweihy et al., 2016; Schreiner et al., 2019). In contrast, customers
may show less interest in customer relationship management and may not be as attracted
to the services provided through relational integration across channels. Therefore, we
posit that relational integration can foster a stronger flow experience during the shopping
process when there is value congruence between retailers and customers. Then, we have
the following hypothesis:

H2c: Value congruence positively moderates the effect of relational integration on the flow
experience.

Flow experience and customer patronage

Extensive research has demonstrated the positive outcomes of flow experiences regard­
ing customer behaviours. For instance, Wang et al. (2007) found that flow experiences
promoted customer patronage in the context of online shopping. Zanjani et al. (2016)
showed that flow experiences stimulated customers’ frequent purchases. In omnichannel
retailing, Ameen et al. (2020) found that flow experiences increased customers’ intention
to revisit smart malls. Given that the flow experience is often accompanied by a profound
sense of happiness, customers are inclined to develop a favourable impression of the
omnichannel retailer that provides them with flow experiences. This positive impression
may enhance customers’ intention to patronise the retailer in the future. According to
flow theory, individuals who have experienced the flow may strive to maintain or
reinforce such desirable experiences through repetitive actions (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990;
Csikszentmihalyi & Larson, 2014). Therefore, customers who have experienced the flow at
an omnichannel retailer are more likely to become regular patrons of that retailer in order
to replicate these compelling experiences for their own sake (Steinhoff et al., 2019). Thus,
we have the following hypothesis:

H3: Flow experience is positively related to customer patronage.

Methodology
Sample and data collection
To test the proposed hypotheses, we conducted a web-based survey using validated
items adapted from previous studies. Before administering the main survey, we
 JOURNAL OF MARKETING MANAGEMENT 163

performed a pilot test among a small group of omnichannel customers and refined the
survey questionnaire based on their feedback. We collected our data in the United States
through an online research platform, namely Amazon Mechanical Turk (https://www.
mturk.com/). This platform has been widely utilised by researchers for data collection
purposes and is recognised for its broad and high-quality pool of participants. The
questionnaire was made publicly available on the platform, and data collection took
place over one month, specifically from January 16 to 20 February 2019.
This study targeted customers who had previous omnichannel shopping experi­
ences with at least one omnichannel retailer. The data collection process consisted of
several steps. First, eligible participants were instructed to randomly select one omni­
channel retailer from a provided list of nearly fifty options, covering various product
categories (e.g. clothing, digital products, household appliances), based on their prior
purchases from both online and offline stores within the past six months. Second,
participants were asked to provide information related to the selected retailer, such as
the duration of their relationship with the retailer and the name of the last product
purchased. Third, they were asked to answer verifying questions (such as experience in
using different channels and omnichannel consumption experience), research variable
items, and attention test questions. A total of 335 questionnaires were collected using
these procedures. To ensure data quality, a qualifying question (i.e. ‘The average
frequency of your use of the retailers’ following channels is?’) was used to filter out
respondents who had never used either the offline or online channels of their selected
retailer. Additionally, we removed questionnaires that indicated regular answers or
failed to pass the attention test. Finally, 292 valid samples remained for statistical
analysis.
Appendix Table A1 shows the demographic characteristics of the sample. Of the
respondents, 57.2% were male and the majority of participants (47.9%) fell within the
age range of 30 and 39 years old. Most of them (70.6%) held a high education degree,
including undergraduate, post-graduate, or higher qualifications. Around half of the
participants (51.0%) reported being married. Their income per month was mainly
between US$ 1000 and 5000 (69.5%) and work hours per week were mainly between
40 and 50 hours (53.1%).

Measurement
All measures in this study were developed from previous research and were confirmed to
be reliable and valid. All constructs were measured using 5-point Likert-type scales
ranging from ‘1 = strongly disagree’ to ‘5 = strongly agree’. Based on the results of the
confirmatory factor analysis, we purified the items with a factor loading significantly far
below 0.60. The final scales appear in Appendix Table A2.
Omnichannel integration refers to the coordination of resources and functions of all
available channels to create synergies (Cao & Li, 2015). Specifically, informational
integration was measured using four items adapted from Oh et al. (2012), transactional
integration was measured using four items adapted from Bendoly et al. (2005), and
relational integration was measured using four items adapted from Jayachandran et al.
(2005). In line with previous omnichannel studies (Ameen et al., 2020; Quach et al.,
2020), this study focused on customers’ overall flow experiences towards a certain
164 L. LIU ET AL.

retailer, without distinguishing between channels. The flow experience in this study was
defined as customers’ perceived total involvement in the shopping process towards an
omnichannel retailer (Csikszentmihalyi, 1975; Novak et al., 2000). To ensure its explana­
tory power, the flow experience was measured as a second-order reflective variable with
five subdimensions (Lin et al., 2019; Mathwick & Rigdon, 2004) – namely, perceived
curiosity, perceived control, heightened enjoyment, focused immersion, and temporal
dissociation (Agarwal & Karahanna, 2000). Customer patronage, as defined by Baker
et al. (2002), was viewed as a broad concept that encompassed the likelihood of both
intending to shop at an omnichannel retailer and recommending this retailer to others.
It was measured using five items adapted from Emrich et al. (2015). Value congruence,
which refers to customers’ perception of the alignment between retailers’ value propo­
sitions and their personal values, was measured using three items adapted from
Maxham and Netemeyer (2003).
We further included several control variables to account for potential factors associated
with the flow experience and customer patronage. Specifically, we controlled for four
demographic variables: age, gender, income, and education. To control the influence of
product type, we further introduced a dummy variable that was assigned a value of one
for electronic products and zero for clothing products.

Data analysis and results

Since the partial least squares structural equation modelling (PLS-SEM) approach is well-
suited for analysing higher-order constructs and complex structures (Ringle et al., 2022;
Wetzels et al., 2009), this study employed PLS-SEM to estimate the research model using
SmartPLS 4.

Common method bias

Given that all data in this study were self-reported and collected from one single source,
our results may be threatened by common method bias. To address this bias procedurally,
we informed the respondents in advance that the questionnaire was anonymous and
would be used solely for research purposes, aiming to reduce social desirability bias
(Trenz et al., 2020). Further, we conducted two tests to assess the presence of the
common method variance in the dataset. We first checked the possible common method
bias using Harman’s one-factor test conducted by SPSS 26.0 (Podsakoff et al., 2003). The
results showed that the items were loaded into six distinct constructs, with eigenvalues
greater than 1.0, accounting for a cumulative variance of 65.76%. The first construct did
not account for the majority of the variance (32.45%), which was significantly below the
recommended threshold of 50%. In addition, we followed the guidelines proposed by
Liang et al. (2007) and compared the variances explained by trait factors and method
factors, as shown in Appendix Table A3. The results showed that the trait factors
accounted for 71.8% of the total variances, while the method factors explained only
0.4% of the variances. Based on the above results, we concluded that common method
bias was not a substantial threat in this study.
 JOURNAL OF MARKETING MANAGEMENT 165

Measurement model
All variables in this study were measured as reflective factors. The values of composite
reliability ranged from 0.818 to 0.956, surpassing the benchmark of 0.7. Additionally, the
values of Cronbach’s alpha ranged from 0.702 to 0.930, exceeding the benchmark value of
0.70. These findings provided evidence for the internal consistency reliability of the con­
structs examined in this study. Convergent validity was assessed using individual item
loadings and Average Variance Extracted (AVE). The loadings ranged from 0.640 to 0.944
and were significant at a level of 0.001 (see Appendix Table A2). Moreover, the AVE scores
for the constructs ranged from 0.530 to 0.878, surpassing the recommended benchmark of
0.50 (Fornell & Larcker, 1981), suggesting that the majority of the variances in the constructs
were captured by the indicators rather than attributed to measurement errors. Hence, the
measurement items exhibited satisfactory levels of convergent validity. To assess discrimi­
nant validity, several approaches were employed. Firstly, the correlations between con­
structs were all below the square root of the AVE value of either construct (see Appendix
Table A4). Secondly, the cross-loadings of each item’s outer loading on its associated
construct were consistently higher than all its loadings on other constructs (see Appendix
Table A5). Lastly, the highest heterotrait-monotrait (HTMT) values were all below the
threshold of 0.85 (see Appendix Table A6). These results provided strong support for the
discriminant validity of the constructs (Henseler et al., 2015).
Since the inter-construct correlation between perceived curiosity and heightened enjoy­
ment was 0.7, as presented in Appendix Table A4, we conducted a multicollinearity test. The
results showed that the highest variance inflation factor was 2.77, which was well below the
threshold of 10. Additionally, the lowest tolerance value was 0.361, above the recom­
mended value of 0.1. These findings suggested that multicollinearity was not a significant
issue in our dataset (Mason & Perreault, 1991).

Structural model
The results of our structural model, obtained through the bootstrap procedure with 5000
resamples, are presented in Figure 2. The model explained a significant amount of

Figure 2. Results of the structural model analysis.

166 L. LIU ET AL.

variance in the endogenous constructs, with an R2 of 0.329 for the flow experience and
0.390 for customer patronage. These values exceed the recommended threshold of 10%
(Falk & Miller, 1992), indicating a satisfactory level of explanation. Consistent with our
expectation, we found that transactional integration (β = 0.189, p < 0.05) and relational
integration (β = 0.382, p < 0.001) were positively related to the flow experience. However,
informational integration did not have a significant effect (β = 0.047, p > 0.05) on the flow
experience. Therefore, H1b and H1c were supported, but H1a was not supported.
Furthermore, value congruence positively moderated the effect of informational inte­
gration on the flow experience (β = 0.109, p < 0.05), as well as the effect of relational
integration on the flow experience (β = 0.133, p < 0.01). Thus, H2a and H2c were sup­
ported. However, value congruence had an insignificant moderating role (β = 0.084, p >
0.05) in the effect of transactional integration on the flow experience. Thus, H2b was not
supported. Moreover, we found that the flow experience was positively related to
customer patronage (β = 0.461, p < 0.001), thus H3 was supported.
Regarding the control variables, the results showed that age (β = −0.117, p < 0.05) and
gender (β = 0.132, p < 0.01) had a significant effect on the flow experience. These findings
indicated that younger customers and male customers were more likely to experience the
flow in omnichannel retailing.

Mediating test
We further employed bootstrapping procedures with 5,000 draws to assess the mediating
role of the flow experience in the effect of omnichannel integration on customer patron­
age (Hair et al., 2016; Zhao et al., 2010). The results are shown in Appendix Table A7. When
not including the flow experience, informational integration (β = 0.153, p < 0.01), transac­
tional integration (β = 0.222, p < 0.01), and relational integration (β = 0.241, p < 0.001) all
had significantly positive effects on customer patronage. Then, we examined the indirect
effects of these three types of omnichannel integration on customer patronage through
the flow experience. In particular, the indirect effect of informational integration on
customer patronage through the flow experience (β = 0.022, p > 0.05) was insignificant.
Besides, the indirect effect of transactional integration through the flow experience on
customer patronage was significant (β = 0.087, p < 0.05), with the 95% bootstrap confi­
dence intervals limits not containing zero ([0.016, 0.176]), and the direct effect of transac­
tional integration on customer patronage became insignificant after entering the flow
experience. Similarly, the indirect effect of relational integration through the flow experi­
ence on customer patronage was also significant (β = 0.176, p < 0.001), with the 95%
bootstrap confidence intervals excluding zero ([0.110, 0.262]), and the direct effect of
relational integration on customer patronage became insignificant after entering the flow
experience. Accordingly, these findings indicated that the flow experience fully mediated
both the effect of transactional integration and the effect of relational integration on
customer patronage.

Additional test
To gather further insights, we examined the role of the subdimensions of the flow
experience (i.e. perceived curiosity, perceived control, heightened enjoyment, focused
 JOURNAL OF MARKETING MANAGEMENT 167

immersion, and temporal dissociation). We also employed a structural equation model to

analyse these subdimensions. Among the five subdimensions, informational integration
had a significantly positive effect solely on perceived control (β = 0.306, p < 0.001); trans­
actional integration exhibited a significantly positive effect on both perceived curiosity (β
= 0.177, p < 0.05) and focused immersion (β = 0.230, p < 0.05); and relational integration
displayed significantly positive effects on perceived curiosity (β = 0.386, p < 0.001), heigh­
tened enjoyment (β = 0.426, p < 0.001), focused immersion (β = 0.207, p < 0.01), and tem­
poral dissociation (β = 0.283, p < 0.001). These findings provided insight into the specific
effects of informational, transactional, and relational integration on the corresponding
subdimensions of the flow experience.
Furthermore, value congruence only positively moderated the effect of informa­
tional integration on perceived curiosity (β = 0.120, p < 0.05) among all the subdimen­
sions of the flow experience. However, the analysis did not yield evidence supporting
the presence of a significant moderating effect of value congruence on the effect of
transactional integration on the five subdimensions of the flow experience. Regarding
relational integration, value congruence positively moderated its effects on heigh­
tened enjoyment (β = 0.105, p < 0.05), focused immersion (β = 0.170, p < 0.01), and
temporal dissociation (β = 0.113, p < 0.05). Moreover, we found that all the subdimen­
sions of the flow experience significantly and positively influenced customer
patronage.

Discussion
This study aims to investigate the impact of omnichannel integration, including informa­
tional, transactional, and relational integration, on customer patronage through the flow
experience. Additionally, we examine the moderating role of retailer-customer value
congruence in the effect of omnichannel integration on the flow experience. The key
findings of our study are summarised below.
First, our results show the positive effect of transactional integration on the flow
experience as expected, indicating that customers are more likely to enjoy and immerse
themselves in the shopping process when they receive integrated transactional services
across channels. Additionally, our results confirm that relational integration has
a significant positive impact on the flow experience. This finding suggests that integrating
customer relationships across channels can effectively encourage customers to become
deeply involved in the shopping process. However, we do not find support for the positive
effect of informational integration on flow experiences. A plausible explanation is that
informational integration may not effectively provide tailored information that aligns with
customer preferences, thereby failing to generate customer interest. Additionally, the
low-interactivity nature of informational integration may potentially result in customers
feeling a loss of control over the shopping process, making them more susceptible to
distractions from other retailers (Berger et al., 2018; Oh & Teo, 2010).
Second, our results showed that value congruence enhances the effects of informa­
tional integration and relational integration on the flow experience. This finding provides
evidence that customers respond more positively to retailers whose value propositions
align with their personal values. However, we do not find a moderating role for value
congruence in the effect of transactional integration on the flow experience. One possible
168 L. LIU ET AL.

explanation for this result is that customers may prioritise the effectiveness and reliability
of completing transactions across different channels, placing less emphasis on value-
oriented issues regarding transactional interaction. Moreover, our results confirm the
positive effect of the flow experience on customer patronage in omnichannel retailing.
This finding illustrates that customers who experience a high-level flow while interacting
with an omnichannel retailer are more likely to patronise this retailer in the future.
Third, our results provide strong support for the mediating role of the flow experi­
ence in the impact of omnichannel integration on customer patronage. Specifically,
our findings indicate that the flow experience plays an important role in explaining
how both transactional integration and relational integration influence customer
patronage. This emphasises the significance of creating and nurturing flow experi­
ences through omnichannel integration in the context of omnichannel retailing to
drive customer patronage.
Finally, our additional analysis of the subdimensions of the flow experience has yielded
intriguing findings that enhance our understanding of how specific aspects of flow
experiences are generated within the context of omnichannel retailing. In particular,
our findings indicate that while informational integration alone may not directly lead to
a holistic flow experience, it significantly increases perceived control across all subdimen­
sions of flow experiences. This finding supports the notion that perceived control is
closely linked to information search activities (Huang et al., 2014). Interestingly, relational
integration emerges as a significant driver of all subdimensions of flow experiences,
except for perceived control. In this case, the combination of informational integration
and relational integration may enable customers to be fully involved in the shopping
process. Regarding transactional integration, its main advantage is to arouse customers’
curiosity and immerse them in the shopping experience, which can be particularly
combined with informational integration to further improve customer experiences.
Furthermore, all subdimensions of the flow experience exhibit positive impacts on
customer patronage, highlighting the promising value of the flow experience, including
its subdimensions, in fostering customer patronage towards omnichannel retailers.
In terms of the moderating analysis, value congruence specifically reinforces the effect
of informational integration on perceived curiosity across all subdimensions of the flow
experience. However, our results show that value congruence does not moderate the
effect of transactional integration on all subdimensions of flow experiences, which aligns
with our earlier findings regarding the second-order flow experience. Besides, our results
indicate that value congruence can strengthen the impacts of relational integration in
facilitating immersive experiences and delighting customers in the shopping process.
These findings further support our previous conclusions that informational and relational
integration work together to complement each other in facilitating flow experiences.

Implications for theory

This study contributes to extant studies on omnichannel retailing and the flow theory in
several ways. First, this study advances our understanding of the impact of omnichannel
integration on customer patronage by shedding light on the mediating role played by the
flow experience. While previous research has acknowledged the importance of customer
experience in omnichannel retailing (Kumar et al., 2019; Lee et al., 2019), there has been
 JOURNAL OF MARKETING MANAGEMENT 169

limited understanding of how omnichannel integration specifically fosters compelling

customer experiences during the shopping process and subsequently leads to increased
patronage (Alba & Williams, 2013). To fill this research gap, our study leverages the
concept of the flow experience, which captures the essence of an optimal customer
experience, to elucidate the mechanisms through which omnichannel integration influ­
ences customer patronage. Also, our work contributes empirical evidence regarding how
the flow experience mediates the effects of different types of omnichannel integration on
customer patronage. Moreover, given the tremendous trend and heightened interactivity
of omnichannel retailing, our study adds significant value to the existing body of knowl­
edge by exploring the ability of omnichannel integration to enhance flow experiences.
Second, this study represents the first attempt to examine the moderating role of value
congruence in the impact of omnichannel integration, to the best of our knowledge.
Extant studies have mainly focused on the boundary conditions of omnichannel integra­
tion concerning customer-related or retailer-related factors (Herhausen et al., 2015; Li
et al., 2018), leaving limited understanding of the moderating effect of retailer-customer
congruence. In the current study, we reveal that customers are more likely to experience
a heightened sense of flow through the informational integration and relational integra­
tion provided by retailers who hold congruent values with them. The finding corroborates
the research of Emrich and Verhoef (2015), which suggests that the match between
retailers’ value proposition and customers’ shopping orientation enhances customer
evaluation of the omnichannel environment. Accordingly, this study extends and enriches
extant omnichannel studies on the boundary conditions of omnichannel integration.
Third, we extend the current knowledge of flow theory by applying it within the
context of omnichannel retailing. While previous studies have demonstrated that the
flow experience can produce favourable customer behaviours in omnichannel retailing
(Ameen et al., 2020; Quach et al., 2020), the understanding of how omnichannel char­
acteristics can evoke flow experiences is largely limited. In this study, we reveal that
omnichannel integration serves as an important situational antecedent of flow experi­
ences in omnichannel retailing, and this linkage can be further strengthened by the value
congruence between retailers and customers. Moreover, our findings highlight the
importance of examining the subdimensions of the flow experience to gain more
nuanced insights into how flow experiences are generated in the context of omnichannel
retailing. Future studies can utilise this framework as potential guidance to further
investigate the effective cultivation of flow experiences in omnichannel environments.

Implications for practice

This study provides several managerial suggestions for omnichannel retailers. Considering
the substantial investment in omnichannel retailing, the returns of omnichannel integra­
tion have always been a major concern for retailers. Our findings may provide retailers
with increased confidence in implementing omnichannel integration, as they present
empirical evidence of the valuable benefits omnichannel integration brings in terms of
enhancing customer patronage. Furthermore, our study underscores the importance of
prioritising customer experiences, particularly flow experiences, as a primary mechanism
through which omnichannel integration drives customer patronage. However, it cautions
that not all aspects of omnichannel integration can effectively facilitate flow experiences.
170 L. LIU ET AL.

Specifically, our findings indicate that the integration of retail information, such as
promotional information and price information, may not significantly contribute to
fostering flow experiences. Instead, omnichannel retailers are encouraged to focus on
robustly integrating transactional services and building strong customer relationships
across different channels to effectively facilitate flow experiences.
In addition, this study highlights the significance of value congruence in fostering flow
experiences in omnichannel retailing. Our findings demonstrate that customers are more
likely to experience flow from omnichannel integration when omnichannel retailers align with
their values. In this sense, this study suggests that omnichannel retailers can maximise the
advantages of omnichannel integration by incorporating value congruence into their strate­
gies. To achieve this, omnichannel retailers may need to actively seek to understand the value
orientation of their key customers and strive to align their values accordingly. By aligning their
value propositions with customers’ personal values, retailers can create a more captivating
and immersive omnichannel experience. Moreover, our findings suggest that omnichannel
retailers with well-developed informational integration or relational integration, rather than
transactional integration, are more likely to benefit from value congruence in generating flow
experiences. Therefore, omnichannel retailers that prioritise the integration of retail informa­
tion and customer relationships across different channels are suggested to devote significant
efforts in aligning their value propositions with the personal values of their key customers.
Our study also offers valuable insights to omnichannel retailers by examining the
subdimensions of the flow experience and identifying the most effective types of omni­
channel integration for facilitating specific aspects of the flow experience. For instance,
integrating retail information empowers customers by providing them with greater
control over their interactions with omnichannel retailers. Additionally, integrating trans­
action services or customer relationship management across channels helps create
a sense of immersion in the shopping process. Based on our findings, we suggest that
omnichannel retailers need to take advantage of different types of omnichannel integra­
tion to facilitate flow experiences in a targeted manner. It is important to note that there is
no one-size-fits-all approach to leveraging value congruence to enhance flow experiences
through omnichannel integration, and retailers may need to develop specific strategies
based on their existing omnichannel integration infrastructure to deliver value proposi­
tions that align with the preferences of their target customers.

Limitations and future research

While this study provides several interesting findings, it is important to acknowledge its
limitations. First, the measurement of the flow experience in this study relied on customers’
recall of their past omnichannel shopping experiences. While we made efforts to minimise
this bias by selecting respondents who had engaged in omnichannel shopping within the
past six months, the passage of time may influence the accuracy of the recollections. Further
studies can employ immediate measurement methods, such as experimental or field meth­
ods, to enhance the effectiveness of measurements (Steinhoff et al., 2019). Second, this study
focuses specifically on customers’ flow experiences while shopping at a particular omni­
channel retailer, without considering channel transitions in the shopping process. To capture
the effect of omnichannel integration on flow experience more accurately, future research
can explicitly examine customers’ flow experiences after channel transitions. Third, the
 JOURNAL OF MARKETING MANAGEMENT 171

participants in this study were all from the USA, which may limit the generalisability of our
findings. Cultural differences may influence customers’ evaluation criteria for omnichannel
integration and result in varying levels of customer patronage (Nam & Kannan, 2020). Future
studies could collect samples from different countries and regions to analyse cross-cultural
differences based on the findings of this study. Fourth, given the promising value of flow
experiences in facilitating positive customer behaviours, this study only considers the broad
concept of customer patronage as the outcome. We encourage future studies to examine
specific patronage behaviours, such as repurchase behaviours and word-of-mouth, or other
potential variables to yield more interesting findings. Finally, the analysis in this study was
based on cross-sectional data, which may not fully capture the dynamic nature of omni­
channel integration (Saghiri et al., 2017). We suggest future studies could use a longitudinal
design to analyse the long-term effect of omnichannel integration on customer behaviours.

Conclusion
This study provides sufficient empirical evidence regarding the influence of omnichannel
integration, including informational, transactional, and relational integration, on customer
patronage. Our work emphasises the vital role played by the flow experience in mediating the
effect of omnichannel integration and customer patronage. Furthermore, this study offers
novel insights into how retailer-customer value congruence strengthens the effect of omni­
channel integration on the flow experience. Overall, this study contributes to our under­
standing of how omnichannel retailers can leverage omnichannel integration and value
propositions to promote customer patronage. We hope that this study will encourage further
research in developing effective omnichannel strategies to enhance customer experiences
and patronage in omnichannel retailing.

Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Funding
This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC: 72332007,
71921001, 72002062) and Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (No.
JZ2023HGTB0277).

Notes on contributors
Lin Liu is a Ph.D. student at the University of Science and Technology of China. His research interests
include omnichannel management and social network analysis. His articles have been accepted by
academic journals and at conferences including Decision Support Systems, the Annual International
Association Communication Conference, and the International Network for Social Network Analysis
Conference.
Yang Li is a lecturer at the School of Management, Hefei University of Technology. She received her
Ph.D. degree in Information Systems at the joint Ph.D. programme between the University of
Science and Technology of China and the City University of Hong Kong. Her research interests
include omnichannel management, supply chain management, and e-commerce. She has
172 L. LIU ET AL.

published in academic journals including Decision Support Systems, IEEE Transactions on Engineering
Management, Journal of Business Research, etc.
Hefu Liu is a professor in the School of Management at the University of Science and Technology of
China. He earned his Ph.D. degree from the University of Science and Technology of China and City
University of Hong Kong. He has published in MIS Quarterly, Journal of Operations Management,
Decision Sciences, Decision Support Systems, Information and Management, International Journal of
Operations and Production Management, and in the academic conference ICIS, PACIS, and AMCIS.
Zhengzhi Guan (Gordon) is an assistant professor in digital media management. His general
research interest is emerging practice and behavioural pattern arising from novel digital
application which includes but is not limited to consumer behaviour in live streaming, pro-
social behaviour in charitable crowdfunding, and collective behavioural pattern on social
media. Some of his work has already been published in internationally reputable journals
such as Information Systems Journal, Internet Research, Information Technology & People,
Industrial Management & Data Systems, and Business History. He has also presented and shared
his research at international conferences including the International Conference on
Information Systems (ICIS), the Pacific Asia Conference on Information Systems (PACIS), the
European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS), and America’s Conference on Information
Systems (AMCIS).

ORCID
Lin Liu http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8315-3923
Yang Li http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4985-4181

References
Agag, G. (2019). E-commerce ethics and its impact on buyer repurchase intentions and loyalty: An
empirical study of small and medium Egyptian businesses. Journal of Business Ethics, 154(2),
389–410. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3452-3
Agarwal, R., & Karahanna, E. (2000). Time flies when you’re having fun: Cognitive absorption and
beliefs about information technology usage. MIS Quarterly, 24(4), 665–694. https://doi.org/10.
2307/3250951
Alba, J. W., & Williams, E. F. (2013). Pleasure principles: A review of research on hedonic consumption.
Journal of Consumer Psychology, 23(1), 2–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2012.07.003
Ameen, N., Tarhini, A., Shah, M. H., & Madichie, N. O. (2020). Going with the flow: Smart shopping
malls and omnichannel retailing. The Journal of Services Marketing, 35(3), 325–348. https://doi.
org/10.1108/jsm-02-2020-0066
Baker, J., Parasuraman, A., Grewal, D., & Voss, G. B. (2002). The influence of multiple store environ­
ment cues on perceived merchandise value and patronage intentions. Journal of Marketing, 66(2),
120–141. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.66.2.120.18470
Baker, T. L., Rapp, A., Meyer, T., & Mullins, R. (2014). The role of brand communications on front line
service employee beliefs, behaviors, and performance. Journal of the Academy of Marketing
Science, 42(6), 642–657. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0376-7
Banerjee, M. (2014). Misalignment and its influence on integration quality in multichannel services.
Journal of Service Research, 17(4), 460–474. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094670514539395
Bell, D. R., Gallino, S., & Moreno, A. (2014). How to win in an omnichannel world. MIT Sloan
Management Review, 56(1), 45.
Bendoly, E., Blocher, J. D., Bretthauer, K. M., Krishnan, S., & Venkataramanan, M. A. (2005). Online/in-
store integration and customer retention. Journal of Service Research, 7(4), 313–327. https://doi.
org/10.1177/1094670504273964
 JOURNAL OF MARKETING MANAGEMENT 173

Berger, A., Schlager, T., Sprott, D. E., & Herrmann, A. (2018). Gamified interactions: Whether, when,
and how games facilitate self-brand connections. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 46
(4), 652–673. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-017-0530-0
Blut, M., Teller, C., & Floh, A. (2018). Testing retail marketing-mix effects on patronage: A
meta-analysis. Journal of Retailing, 94(2), 113–135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretai.2018.03.001
Boden, J., Maier, E., & Dost, F. (2020). The effect of electronic shelf labels on store revenue.
International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 24(4), 527–550. https://doi.org/10.1080/10864415.
2020.1806472
Cable, D. M., & Judge, T. A. (1997). Interviewers’ perceptions of person–organization fit and
organizational selection decisions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(4), 546. https://doi.org/10.
1037/0021-9010.82.4.546
Cao, L. L., & Li, L. (2015). The impact of cross-channel integration on retailers’ sales growth. Journal of
Retailing, 91(2), 198–216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretai.2014.12.005
Cazier, J. A., Shao, B. B. M., & Louis, R. D. S. (2007). Sharing information and building trust through
value congruence. Information Systems Frontiers, 9(5), 515–529. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-
007-9051-6
Cheng, K., Wei, F., & Lin, Y. (2019). The trickle-down effect of responsible leadership on unethical
pro-organizational behavior: The moderating role of leader-follower value congruence. Journal of
Business Research, 102, 34–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.04.044
Cocco, H., & Demoulin, N. T. (2022). Designing a seamless shopping journey through omnichannel
retailer integration. Journal of Business Research, 150, 461–475. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.
2022.06.031
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1975). Beyond boredom and anxiety. Jossey-Bass.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience (Vol. 1990). Harper & Row.
Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Larson, R. (2014). Play and intrinsic rewards. In Flow and the foundations of
positive psychology (pp. 135–153). Springer.
Cui, T. H., Ghose, A., Halaburda, H., Iyengar, R., Pauwels, K., Sriram, S., Tucker, C., & Venkataraman, S.
(2021). Informational challenges in omnichannel marketing: Remedies and future research.
Journal of Marketing, 85(1), 103–120. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022242920968810
Edwards, J. R., & Cable, D. A. (2009). The value of value congruence. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94
(3), 654–677. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014891
Elbedweihy, A. M., Jayawardhena, C., Elsharnouby, M. H., & Elsharnouby, T. H. (2016). Customer
relationship building: The role of brand attractiveness and consumer-brand identification. Journal
of Business Research, 69(8), 2901–2910. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.12.059
Elsharnouby, M. H., Elsharnouby, T. H., Jayawardhena, C., & Elbedweihy, A. M. (2023). Consumers as
volunteers? The influence of value congruence on consumers’ voluntary performance. Journal of
Marketing Analytics, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41270-023-00210-0
Emrich, O., Paul, M., & Rudolph, T. (2015). Shopping benefits of multichannel assortment integration
and the moderating role of retailer type. Journal of Retailing, 91(2), 326–342. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.jretai.2014.12.003
Emrich, O., & Verhoef, P. C. (2015). The impact of a homogenous versus a prototypical web design on
online retail patronage for multichannel providers. International Journal of Research in Marketing,
32(4), 363–374. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2015.04.002
Falk, R. F., & Miller, N. B. (1992). A primer for soft modeling. University of Akron Press.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables
and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50. https://doi.org/10.1177/
002224378101800104
Frasquet, M., & Miquel, M.-J. (2017). Do channel integration efforts pay-off in terms of online and
offline customer loyalty? International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 45(7/8),
859–873. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJRDM-10-2016-0175
Gao, W., Fan, H., Li, W., & Wang, H. (2021). Crafting the customer experience in omnichannel
contexts: The role of channel integration. Journal of Business Research, 126, 12–22. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.12.056
174 L. LIU ET AL.

Gao, F., & Su, X. (2017). Omnichannel retail operations with buy-online-and-pick-up-in-store.
Management Science, 63(8), 2478–2492. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2016.2473
Guo, Y. M., & Poole, M. S. (2009). Antecedents of flow in online shopping: A test of alternative
models. Information Systems Journal, 19(4), 369–390. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2575.2007.
00292.x
Guo, Z. X., Xiao, L., Van Toorn, C., Lai, Y. H., & Seo, C. Y. (2016). Promoting online learners’ continuance
intention: An integrated flow framework. Information & Management, 53(2), 279–295. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.im.2015.10.010
Hair, J. F., Jr., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C., & Sarstedt, M. (2016). A primer on partial least squares structural
equation modeling. Sage Publications.
He, J., Huang, H., & Wu, W. (2018). Influence of interfirm brand values congruence on relationship
qualities in B2B contexts. Industrial Marketing Management, 72, 161–173. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.indmarman.2018.02.015
Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in
variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(1),
115–135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8
Herhausen, D., Binder, J., Schoegel, M., & Herrmann, A. (2015). Integrating bricks with clicks:
Retailer-level and channel-level outcomes of online-offline channel integration. Journal of
Retailing, 91(2), 309–325. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretai.2014.12.009
Hoffman, D. L., & Novak, T. P. (1996). Marketing in hypermedia computer-mediated environments:
Conceptual foundations. Journal of Marketing, 60(3), 50–68. https://doi.org/10.1177/
002224299606000304
Hossain, T. M. T., Akter, S., Kattiyapornpong, U., & Dwivedi, Y. (2020). Reconceptualizing integration
quality dynamics for omnichannel marketing. Industrial Marketing Management, 87, 225–241.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2019.12.006
Huang, L. Y., Hsieh, Y. J., & Wu, Y. C. J. (2014). Gratifications and social network service usage: The
mediating role of online experience. Information & Management, 51(6), 774–782. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.im.2014.05.004
Hwang, J., & Choi, L. (2020). Having fun while receiving rewards?: Exploration of gamification in
loyalty programs for consumer loyalty. Journal of Business Research, 106, 365–376. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.01.031
Javornik, A. (2016). ‘It’s an illusion, but it looks real!’ Consumer affective, cognitive and behavioural
responses to augmented reality applications. Journal of Marketing Management, 32(9–10),
987–1011. https://doi.org/10.1080/0267257X.2016.1174726
Jayachandran, S., Sharma, S., Kaufman, P., & Raman, P. (2005). The role of relational information
processes and technology use in customer relationship management. Journal of Marketing, 69(4),
177–192. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.2005.69.4.177
Kim, T.-Y., & Kim, M. (2012). Leaders’ moral competence and employee outcomes: The effects of
psychological empowerment and person–supervisor fit. Journal of Business Ethics, 112(1),
155–166. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1238-1
Kumar, V., Rajan, B., Gupta, S., & Dalla Pozza, I. (2019). Customer engagement in service. Journal of
the Academy of Marketing Science, 47(1), 138–160. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-017-0565-2
Lee, Z. W. Y., Chan, T. K. H., Chong, A. Y.-L., & Thadani, D. R. (2019). Customer engagement through
omnichannel retailing: The effects of channel integration quality. Industrial Marketing
Management, 77, 90–101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2018.12.004
Lee, D., Choi, Y., Youn, S., & Chun, J. U. (2017). Ethical leadership and employee moral voice: The
mediating role of moral efficacy and the moderating role of leader–follower value congruence.
Journal of Business Ethics, 141(1), 47–57. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2689-y
Liang, H., Saraf, N., Hu, Q., & Xue, Y. (2007). Assimilation of enterprise systems: The effect of
institutional pressures and the mediating role of top management. MIS Quarterly, 31(1), 59–87.
https://doi.org/10.2307/25148781
Li, Y., Liu, H. F., Lee, M., & Huang, Q. (2020). Information privacy concern and deception in online
retailing: The moderating effect of online-offline information integration. Internet Research, 30(2),
511–537. https://doi.org/10.1108/intr-02-2018-0066
 JOURNAL OF MARKETING MANAGEMENT 175

Li, Y., Liu, H., Lim, E. T. K., Goh, J. M., Yang, F., & Lee, M. K. O. (2018). Customer’s reaction to cross-
channel integration in omnichannel retailing: The mediating roles of retailer uncertainty, identity
attractiveness, and switching costs. Decision Support Systems, 109, 50–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.dss.2017.12.010
Lin, S.-W., Huang, E. Y., & Cheng, K.-T. (2023). A binding tie: Why do customers stick to omnichannel
retailers? Information Technology & People, 36(3), 1126–1159. https://doi.org/10.1108/ITP-01-
2021-0063
Lin, C. W., Wang, K. Y., Chang, S. H., & Lin, J. A. (2019). Investigating the development of brand loyalty
in brand communities from a positive psychology perspective. Journal of Business Research, 99,
446–455. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.08.033
Li, Y., Tan, R., & Gong, X. (2023). How omnichannel integration promotes customer word-of-mouth
behaviors: The mediating roles of perceived personal preference fit and perceived social
relatedness. Information Technology & People, 36(4), 1726–1753. https://doi.org/10.1108/ITP-06-
2021-0440
Mason, C. H., & Perreault, W. D., Jr. (1991). Collinearity, power, and interpretation of multiple
regression analysis. Journal of Marketing Research, 28(3), 268–280. https://doi.org/10.1177/
002224379102800302
Mathwick, C., & Rigdon, E. (2004). Play, flow, and the online search experience. The Journal of
Consumer Research, 31(2), 324–332. https://doi.org/10.1086/422111
Ma, T., Wu, X., & Li, Y. (2023). Integrating online and offline channels for online customer loyalty: The
moderating role of retailer credibility. Information Technology & People, 36(2), 758–784. https://
doi.org/10.1108/ITP-06-2021-0441
Maxham, J. G., III, & Netemeyer, R. G. (2003). Firms reap what they sow: The effects of shared values
and perceived organizational justice on customers’ evaluations of complaint handling. Journal of
Marketing, 67(1), 46–62. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.67.1.46.18591
Melis, K., Campo, K., Lamey, L., & Breugelmans, E. (2016). A bigger slice of the multichannel grocery
pie: When does consumers’ online channel use expand retailers’ share of wallet? Journal of
Retailing, 92(3), 268–286. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretai.2016.05.001
Nakamura, J., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2002). The concept of flow. In Handbook of Positive Psychology
(pp. 89–105).
Nam, H., & Kannan, P. K. (2020). Digital environment in global markets: Cross-cultural Implications for
evolving customer journeys. Journal of International Marketing, 28(1), 28–47. https://doi.org/10.
1177/1069031x19898767
Neslin, S. A. (2022). The omnichannel continuum: Integrating online and offline channels along the
customer journey. Journal of Retailing, 98(1), 111–132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretai.2022.02.003
Novak, T. P., Hoffman, D. L., & Yung, Y. F. (2000). Measuring the customer experience in online
environments: A structural modeling approach. Marketing Science, 19(1), 22–42. https://doi.org/
10.1287/mksc.19.1.22.15184
Oh, L.-B., & Teo, H.-H. (2010). Consumer value co-creation in a hybrid commerce service-delivery
system. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 14(3), 35–62. https://doi.org/10.2753/
JEC1086-4415140303
Oh, L.-B., Teo, H.-H., & Sambamurthy, V. (2012). The effects of retail channel integration through the
use of information technologies on firm performance. Journal of Operations Management, 30(5),
368–381. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2012.03.001
Payne, A., & Frow, P. (2006). Customer relationship management: From strategy to implementation.
Journal of Marketing Management, 22(1–2), 135–168. https://doi.org/10.1362/026725706776022272
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in
behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879
Posner, B. Z. (2010). Another look at the impact of personal and organizational values congruency.
Journal of Business Ethics, 97(4), 535–541. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-010-0530-1
Quach, S., Barari, M., Moudrý, D. V., & Quach, K. (2020). Service integration in omnichannel retailing
and its impact on customer experience. Journal of Retailing & Consumer Services, 65, 102267.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2020.102267
176 L. LIU ET AL.

ReporterLinker. (2022). Global retail omni-channel commerce platform industry. https://www.repor

tlinker.com/p05820120/Global-Retail-Omni-Channel-Commerce-Platform-Industry.html?utm_
source=GNW
Ringle, C. M., Wende, S., & Becker, J.-M. (2022). SmartPLS 4. SmartPLS. https://www.smartpls.com
Rodríguez-Torrico, P., Trabold Apadula, L., San-Martín, S., & San José Cabezudo, R. (2020). Have an
omnichannel seamless interaction experience! Dimensions and effect on consumer satisfaction.
Journal of Marketing Management, 36(17–18), 1731–1761. https://doi.org/10.1080/0267257X.
2020.1801798
Roy, S. K., Balaji, M. S., & Nguyen, B. (2020). Consumer-computer interaction and in-store smart
technology (IST) in the retail industry: The role of motivation, opportunity, and ability. Journal of
Marketing Management, 36(3–4), 299–333. https://doi.org/10.1080/0267257x.2020.1736130
Saghiri, S., Wilding, R., Mena, C., & Bourlakis, M. (2017). Toward a three-dimensional framework for
omni-channel. Journal of Business Research, 77, 53–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.
03.025
Schreiner, T., Rese, A., & Baier, D. (2019). Multichannel personalization: Identifying consumer
preferences for product recommendations in advertisements across different media
channels. Journal of Retailing & Consumer Services, 48, 87–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretcon
ser.2019.02.010
Serkan Akturk, M., Ketzenberg, M., & Heim, G. R. (2018). Assessing impacts of introducing ship-to-
store service on sales and returns in omnichannel retailing: A data analytics study. Journal of
Operations Management, 61(1), 15–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2018.06.004
Shen, X.-L., Li, Y.-J., Sun, Y., & Wang, N. (2018). Channel integration quality, perceived fluency and
omnichannel service usage: The moderating roles of internal and external usage experience.
Decision Support Systems, 109, 61–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2018.01.006
Shi, S. (2020). Conceptualization of omnichannel customer experience and its impact on shopping
intention: A mixed-method approach. International Journal of Information Management, 50,
325–336. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2019.09.001
Shokri, M., & Alavi, A. (2019). The relationship between consumer-brand identification and brand
extension. Journal of Relationship Marketing, 18(2), 124–145. https://doi.org/10.1080/15332667.
2018.1534064
Song, P., Wang, Q., Liu, H., & Li, Q. (2020). The value of buy‐online‐and‐pickup‐in‐store in omni‐
channel: Evidence from customer usage data. Production & Operations Management, 29(4),
995–1010. https://doi.org/10.1111/poms.13146
Steinhoff, L., Arli, D., Weaven, S., & Kozlenkova, I. V. (2019). Online relationship marketing. Journal of
the Academy of Marketing Science, 47(3), 369–393. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-018-0621-6
Sun, Y., Yang, C., Shen, X.-L., & Wang, N. (2020). When digitalized customers meet digitalized
services: A digitalized social cognitive perspective of omnichannel service usage. International
Journal of Information Management, 54, 102200. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2020.102200
Swoboda, B., & Winters, A. (2021). Effects of the most useful offline-online and online-offline channel
integration services for consumers. Decision Support Systems, 145, 113522. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.dss.2021.113522
Tremblay, M. (2020). Is seeing eye to eye always beneficial? How and when (dis) agreement on
service climate influences store turnover and sales performance. Journal of Service Research, 23(1),
70–86. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094670519885442
Trenz, M., Veit, D. J., & Tan, C. W. (2020). Disentangling the impact of omnichannel integration on
consumer behavior in integrated sales channels. MIS Quarterly, 44(3), 1207–1258. https://doi.org/
10.25300/MISQ/2020/14121
van Schie, S., Gautier, A., Pache, A.-C., & Güntert, S. T. (2018). What keeps corporate volunteers
engaged: Extending the volunteer work design model with self-determination theory insights.
Journal of Business Ethics, 160(3), 693–712. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-018-3926-y
Verhoef, P. C., Kannan, P. K., & Inman, J. J. (2015). From multi-channel retailing to omni-channel
retailing. Journal of Retailing, 91(2), 174–181. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretai.2015.02.005
Wang, L. C., Baker, J., Wagner, J. A., & Wakefield, K. (2007). Can a retail web site be social? Journal of
Marketing, 71(3), 143–157. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.71.3.143
 JOURNAL OF MARKETING MANAGEMENT 177

Wang, J. J., & Zhang, C. (2017). The impact of value congruence on marketing channel relationship.
Industrial Marketing Management, 62, 118–127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2016.08.004
Weber, J. (2015). Identifying and assessing managerial value orientations: A cross-generational
replication study of key organizational decision-makers’ values. Journal of Business Ethics, 132
(3), 493–504. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2364-8
Wetzels, M., Odekerken-Schröder, G., & Van Oppen, C. (2009). Using PLS path modeling for assessing
hierarchical construct models: Guidelines and empirical illustration. MIS Quarterly, 33(1), 177–195.
https://doi.org/10.2307/20650284
Yang, Y. Q., Gong, Y. M., Land, L. P. W., & Chesney, T. (2020). Understanding the effects of physical
experience and information integration on consumer use of online to offline commerce.
International Journal of Information Management, 51, 18. Article 102046. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.ijinfomgt.2019.102046
Yim, C. K., Chan, K. W., & Lam, S. S. K. (2012). Do customers and employees enjoy service participa­
tion? Synergistic effects of self- and other-efficacy. Journal of Marketing, 76(6), 121–140. https://
doi.org/10.1509/jm.11.0205
Zanjani, S. H., Milne, G. R., & Miller, E. G. (2016). Procrastinators’ online experience and purchase
behavior. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 44(5), 568–585. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s11747-015-0458-1
Zhang, J., & Bloemer, J. (2011). Impact of value congruence on affective commitment: Examining the
moderating effects. Journal of Service Management, 22(2), 160–182. https://doi.org/10.1108/
09564231111124208
Zhang, J., & Bloemer, J. M. M. (2008). The impact of value congruence on consumer-service brand
relationships. Journal of Service Research, 11(2), 161–178. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094670508322561
Zhang, H., Lu, Y. B., Gupta, S., & Zhao, L. (2014). What motivates customers to participate in social
commerce? The impact of technological environments and virtual customer experiences.
Information & Management, 51(8), 1017–1030. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2014.07.005
Zhang, M., Ren, C. S., Wang, G. A., & He, Z. (2018). The impact of channel integration on consumer
responses in omnichannel retailing: The mediating effect of consumer empowerment. Electronic
Commerce Research and Applications, 28, 181–193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.elerap.2018.02.002
Zhao, H., Chen, Y., & Liu, W. (2022). Socially responsible human resource management and employee
moral voice: Based on the self-determination theory. Journal of Business Ethics, 183(3), 929–946.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-022-05082-5
Zhao, X., Jr., Lynch, J. G., & Chen, Q. (2010). Reconsidering Baron and Kenny: Myths and truths about
mediation analysis. The Journal of Consumer Research, 37(2), 197–206. https://doi.org/10.1086/
651257
178 L. LIU ET AL.

Appendix. Field survey tables

Table A1. Demographic statistics.

Characteristics Levels Frequency Percentage (%)
Gender Male 167 57.2
Female 125 42.8
Age 18–29 53 18.2
30–35 92 31.5
36–39 48 16.4
40–45 41 14.0
46–49 21 7.2
50–55 37 12.7
Education High school or below 45 15.4
Junior college 41 14.0
Undergraduate 129 44.2
Postgraduate or above 77 26.4
Monthly income (Dollar) ≤1000 29 9.9
1001–3000 114 39.0
3001–5000 89 30.5
5001–7000 28 9.6
≥7001 32 11.0
Marital status Single 123 42.1
Married 149 51.0
Divorced 20 6.8
Working time (per week) ≤40 hours 109 37.3
40–50 hours 155 53.1
50–60 hours 22 7.5
≥60 hours 6 2.1

Table A2. Constructs and scales.

Constructs/Scales Loading
Informational Integration (CR = 0.818, Cronbach’s alpha = 0.702, AVE = 0.530)
1. The retailer provides consistent retailer image (e.g. retailer name, slogan, logo), product information (e.g. 0.641
category, price, discount, promotion, inventory), and service descriptions (e.g. delivery, after-sale support)
in the online stores and offline stores.
2. The retailer provides access to offline store information (e.g. store locations, products, inventory) through 0.724
online stores.
3. The retailer provides access to online store information (e.g. product category, inventory, FAQ, online 0.779
functionalities, order list) through offline stores salespeople or mobile applications.
4. The retailer uses customer touchpoints (e.g. email, short message, coupon push message) to communicate 0.761
new product or promotion information in the offline stores and online stores.
Transactional Integration (CR = 0.839, Cronbach’s alpha = 0.745, AVE = 0.567)
1. The retailer provides greater choice for payment in the online stores and offline stores (e.g. cash on 0.774
delivery, buy offline and pay online).
2. The retailer allows for self-collect online purchases in offline stores. 0.796
3. The retailer allows for return, exchange, or repair of online purchases in offline stores. 0.745
4. The retailer provides online customer service (e.g. negotiation, order tracking, technical support, and after- 0.692
sale support) for products purchased in offline stores.
Relational Integration (CR = 0.878, Cronbach’s alpha = 0.814, AVE = 0.642)
1. The retailer provides integrated personal information (e.g. prior integrated history, orders, wish list) of the 0.803
offline stores and online stores.
2. The retailer provides personalised purchase recommendations in offline stores and online stores. 0.798
3. The retailer provides member-owned products and services (e.g. special offerings, tiers, points, rewards) in 0.823
offline stores and online stores.
4. The retailer’s member credits can be accumulated or redeemed in both offline stores and online stores. 0.779
(Continued)
 JOURNAL OF MARKETING MANAGEMENT 179

Table A2. (Continued).

Constructs/Scales Loading
Perceived Curiosity (CR = 0.947, Cronbach’s alpha = 0.917, AVE = 0.857)
Using the retailer’s online stores or offline stores:
1. Excites my curiosity. 0.930
2. Makes me curious. 0.926
3. Arouses my imagination. 0.921
Perceived Control (CR = 0.925, Cronbach’s alpha = 0.879, AVE = 0.805)
When I am interacting with the retailer’s online stores or offline stores:
1. I feel in control over my interaction with the retailer. 0.904
2. I feel that I have control over my interaction with the retailer. 0.884
3. The retailer’s online stores and offline stores allow me to control my interaction with the retailer. 0.905
Heightened Enjoyment (CR = 0.945, Cronbach’s alpha = 0.922, AVE = 0.810)
My feeling towards using both the retailer’s online stores and offline stores
1. I have fun interacting with the retailer’s online stores and offline stores. 0.916
2. Using the retailer’s online stores and offline stores provides me with a lot of enjoyment. 0.904
3. I enjoy using the retailer’s online stores and offline stores. 0.876
4. Using the retailer’s online stores and offline stores makes me happy. 0.904
Focused immersion (CR = 0.912, Cronbach’s alpha = 0.871, AVE = 0.721)
While I am using the retailer’s online stores or offline stores
1. I am able to block out most other distractions. 0.808
2. I am absorbed in what I am doing. 0.852
3. I am immersed in the task I am performing. 0.885
4. My attention does not get diverted very easily. 0.849
Temporal Dissociation (CR = 0.913, Cronbach’s alpha = 0.871, AVE = 0.725)
When I am using the retailer’s online or offline stores
1. Time appears to go by very quickly. 0.882
2. Sometimes I lose track of time. 0.872
3. Time flies. 0.907
4. In most times, I end up spending more time than I had planned 0.734
Customer Patronage (CR = 0.928, Cronbach’s alpha = 0.904, AVE = 0.723)
1. I would consider this retailer to be my first choice. 0.811
2. I would do more business with this retailer in the next few years. 0.784
3. I would say positive things about the retailer to other people. 0.884
4. I would recommend this retailer to someone who seeks my advice. 0.874
5. I would encourage friends and relatives to do business with this retailer. 0.891
Value Congruence (CR = 0.956, Cronbach’s alpha = 0.930, AVE = 0.878)
1. The retailer has the same values as I do with regard to products and services. 0.928
2. In general, my values and the values held by the retailer are very similar. 0.941
3. I believe in the same values held and promoted by the retailer. 0.941
CR = composite reliability; AVE = average variance extracted.
180 L. LIU ET AL.

Table A3. Common method bias analysis.

Construct Indicator Trait Factor Loading (R1) R12 Method Factor Loading (R2) R22
Informational Integration II1 0.617 0.381 0.014 0.000
II2 0.762 0.581 −0.043 0.002
II3 0.786 0.618 0.011 0.000
II4 0.739 0.546 0.019 0.000
Transactional Integration TI1 0.746 0.557 0.025 0.001
TI2 0.755 0.570 0.029 0.001
TI3 0.809 0.654 0.064 0.004
TI4 0.700 0.490 0.012 0.000
Relational Integration RI1 0.750 0.563 0.053 0.003
RI2 0.748 0.560 0.069 0.005
RI3 0.868 0.753 −0.049 0.002
RI4 0.838 0.702 −0.072 0.005
Perceived Curiosity CUR1 0.922 0.850 0.011 0.000
CUR2 0.962 0.925 −0.044 0.002
CUR3 0.892 0.796 0.033 0.001
Perceived Control CON1 0.897 0.805 0.008 0.000
CON2 0.907 0.823 −0.036 0.001
CON3 0.888 0.789 0.028 0.001
Heightened Enjoyment ENJ1 0.889 0.790 0.031 0.001
ENJ2 0.901 0.812 0.004 0.000
ENJ3 0.985 0.970 −0.128 0.016
ENJ4 0.829 0.687 0.088 0.008
Focused Immersion IMM1 0.899 0.808 −0.108 0.012
IMM2 0.829 0.687 0.021 0.000
IMM3 0.843 0.711 0.050 0.003
Temporal Dissociation IMM4 0.829 0.687 0.031 0.001
TD1 0.793 0.629 0.121 0.015
TD2 0.932 0.869 −0.082 0.007
TD3 0.923 0.852 −0.024 0.001
TD4 0.750 0.563 −0.018 0.000
Customer Patronage CP1 0.690 0.476 0.145 0.021
CP2 0.855 0.731 −0.079 0.006
CP3 0.860 0.740 0.029 0.001
CP4 0.969 0.939 −0.122 0.015
CP5 0.870 0.757 0.029 0.001
Value congruence VC1 0.906 0.821 0.028 0.001
VC2 0.933 0.870 0.013 0.000
VC3 0.971 0.943 −0.041 0.002
Average 0.718 0.004

Table A4. Descriptive statistics and correlation.

Construct Mean S.D. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1. Informational Integration 4.12 0.68 0.73
2. Transactional Integration 3.87 0.84 0.54 0.75
3. Relational Integration 3.51 0.93 0.42 0.58 0.80

4. Perceived Curiosity 3.60 1.04 0.22 0.38 0.47 0.93

5. Perceived Control 4.18 0.77 0.40 0.36 0.32 0.27 0.90
6. Heightened Enjoyment 3.60 0.98 0.28 0.38 0.51 0.70 0.35 0.90
7. Focused Immersion 3.87 0.84 0.12 0.27 0.34 0.61 0.20 0.64 0.85
8. Temporal Dissociation 3.29 1.02 0.26 0.38 0.36 0.55 0.44 0.54 0.57 0.85
9. Customer Patronage 4.17 0.80 0.35 0.42 0.41 0.48 0.45 0.53 0.34 0.45 0.85
10. Value congruence 3.65 0.96 0.21 0.38 0.38 0.44 0.19 0.51 0.36 0.32 0.48 0.94
Shaded diagonal represents the square root of the average variance extracted (AVE).
 JOURNAL OF MARKETING MANAGEMENT 181

Table A5. Factor loadings and cross-loading of the reflective constructs.

II TI RI CUR CON ENJ IMM TD CP VC
II1 0.64 0.29 0.12 0.13 0.40 0.17 0.18 0.05 .32 0.14
II2 0.72 0.38 0.29 0.14 0.23 0.18 0.20 0.1 .20 0.14
II3 0.78 0.48 0.39 0.16 0.30 0.20 0.23 0.07 .29 0.16
II4 0.76 0.40 0.40 0.20 0.24 0.26 0.14 0.13 .22 0.16
TI1 0.36 0.77 0.42 0.28 0.31 0.30 0.31 0.21 .36 0.31
TI2 0.38 0.80 0.48 0.35 0.24 0.31 0.35 0.23 .26 0.35
TI3 0.45 0.75 0.42 0.24 0.24 0.26 0.25 0.21 .30 0.23
TI4 0.45 0.69 0.41 0.27 0.30 0.27 0.22 0.16 .36 0.23
RI1 0.43 0.50 0.80 0.34 0.28 0.46 0.32 0.32 .30 0.25
RI2 0.39 0.49 0.80 0.35 0.33 0.42 0.28 0.24 .41 0.35
RI3 0.30 0.43 0.82 0.40 0.22 0.40 0.28 0.25 .34 0.33
RI4 0.23 0.42 0.78 0.42 0.18 0.34 0.27 0.26 .27 0.29
CUR1 0.20 0.34 0.45 0.93 0.26 0.67 0.49 0.55 .46 0.43
CUR2 0.23 0.33 0.40 0.93 0.23 0.63 0.51 0.54 .46 0.39
CUR3 0.18 0.38 0.45 0.92 0.26 0.65 0.53 0.61 .42 0.41
CON1 0.35 0.33 0.29 0.26 0.90 0.32 0.39 0.2 .41 0.17
CON2 0.34 0.29 0.25 0.22 0.88 0.32 0.36 0.16 .38 0.16
CON3 0.40 0.35 0.31 0.24 0.91 0.32 0.42 0.2 .42 0.20
ENJ1 0.22 0.36 0.49 0.66 0.35 0.92 0.52 0.58 .48 0.48
ENJ2 0.28 0.36 0.47 0.60 0.33 0.90 0.51 0.56 .47 0.48
ENJ3 0.24 0.30 0.36 0.59 0.30 0.88 0.45 0.55 .45 0.40
ENJ4 0.27 0.36 0.49 0.68 0.29 0.90 0.49 0.61 .51 0.47
IMM1 0.19 0.30 0.33 0.38 0.40 0.37 0.81 0.36 .32 0.24
IMM2 0.24 0.29 0.27 0.49 0.36 0.48 0.85 0.55 .40 0.22
IMM3 0.27 0.35 0.30 0.52 0.35 0.51 0.89 0.56 .40 0.28
IMM4 0.17 0.35 0.34 0.47 0.38 0.47 0.85 0.45 .41 0.36
TD1 0.11 0.29 0.34 0.59 0.23 0.60 0.54 0.88 .36 0.38
TD2 0.09 0.20 0.27 0.52 0.12 0.55 0.44 0.87 .24 0.28
TD3 0.08 0.22 0.28 0.54 0.18 0.57 0.53 0.91 .31 0.30
TD4 0.13 0.21 0.25 0.42 0.16 0.44 0.42 0.73 .24 0.26
CP1 0.22 0.37 0.44 0.45 0.32 0.50 0.40 0.32 .81 0.45
CP2 0.35 0.36 0.31 0.31 0.40 0.36 0.32 0.21 .79 0.32
CP3 0.30 0.36 0.35 0.43 0.43 0.49 0.41 0.32 .88 0.43
CP4 0.28 0.31 0.28 0.40 0.36 0.41 0.36 0.25 .87 0.39
CP5 0.35 0.39 0.36 0.43 0.41 0.47 0.43 0.32 .89 0.43
VC1 0.23 0.41 0.35 0.40 0.25 0.44 0.33 0.32 .47 0.92
VC2 0.20 0.34 0.36 0.44 0.17 0.50 0.30 0.35 .46 0.94
VC3 0.15 0.31 0.35 0.41 0.13 0.49 0.28 0.34 .42 0.94
II = Informational Integration; TI = Transactional Integration; RI = Relational Integration; CUR = Perceived Curiosity; CON
= Perceived Control; ENJ = Heightened Enjoyment; IMM = Focused Immersion; TD = Temporal Dissociation; CP =
Customer Patronage; VC = Value Congruence.

Table A6. Heterotrait-monotrait ratio.

Heterotrait-monotrait ratio 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1. Informational Integration
2. Transactional Integration 0.75
3. Relational Integration 0.54 0.73
4. Perceived Curiosity 0.27 0.45 0.55
5. Perceived Control 0.52 0.44 0.37 0.30
6. Heightened Enjoyment 0.34 0.46 0.58 0.76 0.39
7. Focused Immersion 0.33 0.46 0.43 0.61 0.50 0.60
8. Temporal Dissociation 0.16 0.33 0.40 0.68 0.23 0.71 0.65
9. Customer Patronage 0.45 0.52 0.48 0.52 0.51 0.58 0.50 0.37
10. Value Congruence 0.26 0.45 0.43 0.48 0.21 0.55 0.36 0.40 0.52
182 L. LIU ET AL.

Table A7. Test of mediating effects by bootstrapping approach.

Indirect effect Direct effect
Proposed 95% Confidence 95% Confidence Types of mediating
relationship Coefficient Intervals Coefficient Intervals effects
II→FE→CP 0.022n.s [−0.039, 0.078] 0.125* [0.015, 0.238] No
TI→FE→CP 0.087* [0.016, 0.176] 0.131n.s [−0.010, 0.275] Full
RI→FE→CP 0.176*** [0.110, 0.262] 0.062n.s [−0.090, 0.213] Full
*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001, n.s = not significant; II = Informational Integration, TI = Transactional Integration, RI
= Relational Integration, FE = Flow Experiences, CP = Customer Patronage.