Search results

The general proposition that a salesperson's explanation adequacy plays a critical role in the resolution of unsatisfactory sales encounters for consumers is investigated in a cross‐sectional context. The findings indicate that explanation adequacy is influenced by both the style and content of the explanation, and the timeliness of an organization's reaction, whereas explanation adequacy only indirectly affects the final perceptions of the severity of the incident and emotional reaction to it. Importantly, the perceptions of the extent of the justice of the resolution and the assignment of blame to external factors were found to be intervening variables. The results also indicated that the assignment of blame to internal factors was unrelated to the adequacy of an explanation, but did influence emotion and the perceived severity on an incident.