Lin Che Sheng , Xue Jun Qi
International Journal of Engineering, Business And Management(IJEBM), Vol-10,Issue-2, April - June 2026, Pages 29-34 , 10.22161/ijebm.10.2.5
Download | Downloads : | Total View : 11
Article Info: Received: 17 Apr 2026; Received in revised form: 15 May 2026; Accepted: 19 May 2026; Available online: 23 May 2026
Cite this Article: APA | ACM | Chicago | Harvard | IEEE | MLA | Vancouver | Bibtex
Amid the expansion of the youth sports training market, course renewal versus dropout has become a critical issue for the sustainable operation of private tennis coaching services. This study aimed to compare renewing and churning families in terms of service experience, trust formation, perception of value evidence, and decision-making mechanisms, and to extract actionable retention governance strategies. A comparative qualitative case study design was adopted, grouping participants into a renewal group (stable renewal for ≥2 cycles or ≥6 months) and a churn group (cessation for ≥8 weeks or explicit termination). Data were collected through semi-structured interviews, process communication records, and coach reflection memos, and thematic analysis combined with cross-group constant comparison was employed to extract themes and mechanistic chains. Five core themes emerged: value evidence (visualization of progress), trust (relational buffer), expectation management and gap repair, service friction (accumulation of rules and coordination costs), and risk and safety thresholds. The renewal pathway follows the chain of evidence-based delivery, trust maintenance, gap repair, friction governance, and safety threshold, whereas the churn pathway is typically triggered by insufficient value evidence and trust gaps, with withdrawal provoked by risk concerns amid time pressure and accumulated rule friction. Enhancing retention therefore hinges not on one-off satisfaction, but on stabilizing parents’ value judgments through evidence-based, explainable, and predictable delivery mechanisms, and on reducing service friction through rule governance.