Search results

The purpose of this paper is to extend thinking on service recovery processes and satisfaction with service recovery, using multi‐dimensional consumer outcomes. The objective of the work was to propose that satisfaction with service recovery should be based on customers' expectations of the recovery encounter, which would be shaped by their expectations of “non‐failed” encounters.

The paper adopts a theoretical approach. Using the existing service recovery literature as well as the traditional services literature, the conceptual framework and associated research propositions are developed.

The proposed framework suggests that service recovery is a service encounter it its own right. The effectiveness of recovery encounters will be based on how encounters operate relative to customer expectations and experiences with regard to the recovery activity.

The research propositions and proposed framework need further empirical investigation.

The proposed framework suggests that managing service recovery should be undertaken in a similar fashion to managing any service, and thus managers need to understand customers' recovery expectations. Organisations also need to consider how a recovery action impacts on a range of customer outcomes, as focusing on one aspect will not capture consumers' full set of behaviours.

The proposed model identifies that service recovery should be evaluated with regard to consumers' recovery expectations and satisfaction is not based on expectations with regard to non‐failed encounters.

Based on appraisal theory and social response theory, this study aims to explore the mechanism of AI failure types on consumer recovery expectation from the perspective of service failure assessment and validate the moderate role of anthropomorphism level.

Three scenario-based experiments were conducted to validate the research model. First, to test the effect of robot service failure types on customer recovery expectation; second, to further test the mediating role of perceived controllability, perceived stability and perceived severity; finally, to verify the moderating effect of anthropomorphic level.

Non-functional failures reduce consumer recovery expectation compared to functional failures; perceived controllability and perceived severity play a mediating role in the impact of service failure types on recovery expectation; the influence of service failure types on perceived controllability and perceived severity is moderated by the anthropomorphism level.

The findings enrich the influence mechanism and boundary conditions of service failure types, and have implications for online enterprise follow-up service recovery and improvement of anthropomorphic design.

To investigate the impact of culture on service recovery expectations.

Service recovery is measured through a recently developed instrument (RECOVSAT), while culture is measured through Hofstede's cultural dimensions. A total of 200 respondents completed the survey. The primary statistical technique used is multiple regression analysis.

The findings support the hypothesis that culture has an impact on service recovery expectations. Three of the five cultural dimensions (i.e. individualism, masculinity, and long‐term orientation) are associated with service recovery expectations. In particular, individualism is linked to higher expectations about empowerment and lower expectations about explanation. Masculinity is associated with higher expectations about the need for explanation and tangibles, whereas long‐term orientation is linked to higher expectations about tangibles.

The study examines service recovery in traditional (as opposed to online) settings.

Four different strategies are recommended for managing service recovery across different cultures.

Findings have important implications for managers interested in the globalization of services.

The purpose of this study is to investigate whether complaint behavior intentions and expectations of service recovery based on the justice theory are different among customers from collectivistic versus individualistic cultures. A secondary purpose is to find which service recovery strategies are appropriate for different culture-based complaint behavior intentions.

A survey was conducted at universities, and the survey population consisted of college students, who are known to be frequent users of fast-food restaurants. A total of 304 usable questionnaires were collected. Confirmatory factor analysis was conducted to verify the validity of the items, Cronbach’s alpha coefficients were used to examine the internal consistency of the factors, and an independent sample t-test was used to analyze differences in complaint behavior intentions and expectations of service recovery efforts in terms of cultural difference.

The results of this study indicated that South Koreans revealed more voice complaint behavior intentions than Americans did. However, there were no significant differences in expectations of service recovery efforts between them. Second, American customers who indicated voice and private complaint behavior intentions expected distributive, procedural and interpersonal justice in complaint-handling procedures. South Korean customers who indicated voice complaint behavior intentions expected distributive and procedural justice, and South Korean customers who indicated private complaint behavior intentions anticipated interactional justice in complaint-handling procedures.

Understanding customers’ complaint behavior intentions and expectations of service recovery based on the justice theory and cultural differences will suggest practical implications to hospitality industry managers for effective service quality management.

Understanding customers’ complaint behavior intentions and expectations of service recovery based on the justice theory and cultural differences will suggest practical implications to hospitality industry managers for effective service quality management.

Due to the importance of understanding what circumstances make customer recovery programmes successful, this paper aims to study the effects of different cognitive evaluations (disconfirmation of expectations and perceived justice) and affective responses (positive and negative emotions) on satisfaction with complaint handling.

The sample used in this study consists of 679 subjects who, over the last six months, had experienced service failures and had afterwards complained. The data were collected via personal interviews using a structured survey.

The results of the study support the model and highlight the importance of the emotions experienced as a result of the complaint handling. Although these emotions have been underrepresented in the service recovery literature, our investigation shows that these emotions not only have an independent effect on customer satisfaction, after accounting for the effects of the cognitive evaluations of complaint handling, but also play a mediating role in the relationship between these cognitive variables and satisfaction.

This study examines only one service context; consequently, caution is needed when generalizing the results.

Given the findings in this paper, identifying customers' emotions can enable service organizations to know their perceptions of the recovery and, hence, adapt service recovery strategies adequately.

This study incorporates the disconfirmation of expectations paradigm and the dimension of informational justice into the existing models of cognitive and affective antecedents of satisfaction with complaint handling. Furthermore, this study is based on the analysis of real service failures and recovery strategies.

This paper aims to argue that, traditionally, service recovery attempts have paid little attention to customer preferences. Despite attempts to recover the customer, firms generally do not know if the recovery solution is what the customer expects. Hence, the paper seeks to examine whether customer recovery preferences influence customers' evaluation of the recovery attempt in terms of recovery satisfaction and repurchase intentions.

First, a two‐stage qualitative study was conducted. Then the research model was tested empirically on a sample of 431 consumers using a multivariate analysis.

The findings support the argument that customers have distinct recovery preferences. Moreover, customers are satisfied with the service recovery solution only when it matches the most demanding recovery preference. Customers' recovery preferences have a significant impact on their satisfaction with recovery and their repurchase intentions.

First, the model developed is tested on a cross‐sectional sample. Second, the measure of recovery satisfaction and repurchase intentions used here was relatively simple. Third, the study relies on repurchase intentions instead of actual behavioural data.

This research indicates that customers have a preference for how service recovery should be undertaken. Given these distinct recovery preferences, different recovery solutions should be applied to address each preference appropriately.

It is widely accepted in the service recovery literature that customers' perceptions of a service recovery attempt are often different to those of the service provider. However, this research suggests that customer recovery preferences need to be carefully considered given their effect on customer satisfaction and repurchase intentions.

Building on disconfirmation theory, equity theory and affect‐balance theory, considers antecedents to satisfaction with service recovery. A theoretical model is proposed and tested empirically based on a cross‐sectional national sample of 201 dissatisfied customers complaining of services. The results suggest that perceived performance of service recovery has an impact on equity. Second, disconfirmation of expectations of service recovery and perceived fairness of outcome of service recovery have an impact on satisfaction with service recovery. Finally, negative affect caused by the initial service failure does not have an impact on satisfaction with service recovery.

The intense queuing phenomenon in Chinese banks has been a critical issue for bank managers for a long time, especially in big cities, which increases the possibility of customer dissatisfaction. Against this background, the purpose of this paper is to explore the antecedents of post‐recovery satisfaction within China's “Big 4” commercial banks. By tracking the nature of service failures and examining the overall performance of the service recovery process in the Chinese banking industry, the authors aim to investigate how customer expectations, their perception of recovery justice and recovery quality affect customer satisfaction under service recovery context.

Based on disconfirmation paradigm and fairness theory, a conceptual model with 12 hypotheses was derived for the banking sector. With reference to the instruments RECOVSAT and SERVQUAL scale, a questionnaire was developed and sent to a geographically stratified, random sample of 300 participants in Changsha City. Confirmatory factor analysis was used for reliability/validity testing, and the hypothesised relationships among the latent constructs were estimated using structural equation modelling.

Consistent with most previous researches, the empirical results supported the idea that recovery expectation negatively influenced the recovery quality perceptions, expectancy disconfirmation and satisfaction with service recovery. Other findings included that both positive disconfirmation and recovery quality perceptions had positive effect on recovery satisfaction. However, unlike other studies relating to service justice, interactional justice was found to have no significant effect on quality perception or satisfaction with recovery, and this was attributed to customer's higher tolerance zone under the particular competition environment in China.

By exploring the antecedents of post‐recovery satisfaction within China's “Big 4” commercial banks, the study provided valuable findings in relation to participants' perceptions on recovery justice and quality. It highlighted the effect of characteristics of Chinese customers on post‐recovery satisfaction, and the importance of good understanding of customer expectation and employee empowerment in the banking industry.

Focuses on an empirical investigation of service failures and service recovery in retail banking. Different types of failures, and the recovery strategies used by Greek banks to respond to them, were identified using the critical incident technique. A survey questionnaire was then developed to measure customers’ perceptions of the magnitude of service failures and the effectiveness of service recovery strategies. A number of research hypotheses were tested relating to customers’ evaluations of particular banking failures and recovery strategies, their previous experience of failures, demographic variables, and relationships with their banks. Service failures were found to be of varying importance and different service recovery strategies more effective for particular failures; further, customers with long relationships or high deposits with their banks were more demanding with respect to service recovery.

In the last ten years, businesses taking advantage of market deregulation, call‐centre, intranet and internet technology have broken traditional marketing norms and path‐dependent customer management practices. These businesses offer substantially lower prices and good customer service. In spite of anecdotal evidence of the high level of service complaints in the press, these businesses are expanding rapidly by growing the market and by taking share from traditional suppliers. Service failure recovery and complaint management are two areas which are extensively re‐designed by such businesses. This paper aims to identify and examine such new practices. The authors suggest that the traditional “customer‐centricity” model is being replaced by a “customer‐compliance business model” (CCBM) of service provision. This new model and its propositions defy conventional thinking in the areas of service recovery and complaint management.

Available data and research are reviewed, in an attempt to understand CCBM. Differences with the customer‐centricity model are discussed.

CCBM cannot be explained adequately by current assumptions in marketing. It breaks commonplace marketing expectations about service failure and recovery.

The emphasis is on explaining innovations in service recovery and complaint management.

Companies which operate the CCBM model are of growing importance to developed, service‐oriented economies. The paper builds on evidence to show how CCBM businesses have abandoned or minimised costly customer centricity and have broken past norms and conventional marketing thinking and practice.

The scarcity of research in this area is explained by the recent, rapid evolution of these new model businesses. The study reveals and makes sense of important trends in service provision, distinct from and incompatible with normative arguments in some academic writings that advocate service recovery excellence.