nach oben

Marketing Letters

Erschienen in:

03.10.2018

Customer participation in service recovery: a meta-analysis

verfasst von: Yves Van Vaerenbergh, Simon Hazée, Annelies Costers

Erschienen in: Marketing Letters | Ausgabe 4/2018

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

Research on customer participation in service recovery is surging, yet empirical examinations provide mixed results. A meta-analysis of 30 independent samples reported in 21 studies (N = 7872) shows that the effect sizes for the relationships between customer participation in service recovery and customer outcomes are rather weak. We also find that customer participation in service recovery has an indirect effect on satisfaction with service recovery via distributive justice and procedural justice, but not via interactional justice. Conversely, customer participation in service recovery has an indirect effect on overall satisfaction via distributive justice and interactional justice, but not via procedural justice. Finally, the effectiveness of customer participation in service recovery is stronger when customers participate in the outcome of the recovery and for customers with an Eastern cultural background, but weaker when additional compensation is offered and in online settings.

Vorheriger Artikel Narratives of technology consumption in the face of marketplace discrimination

Nächster Artikel The featuring phenomenon in music: how combining artists of different genres increases a song’s popularity

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich

Multilevel meta-regressions often suffer from multicollinearity (e.g., Pick and Eisend 2016). Unfortunately, multilevel models do not offer a direct diagnostic for multicollinearity. Similar to Pick and Eisend (2016), we applied the variables in a linear regression model. The variance inflation factors (maximum VIF = 3.0) fall below the recommended threshold, suggesting that multicollinearity is not an issue.

We also ran a more parsimonious model, in which we used one intercept rather than the set of dependent variable-specific intercepts at level 1. The model fit did not change significantly (∆χ²(7) = 3.511, p > .05). The results for the moderators did not vary substantially.

Additional tests show that the strength of this effect does not depend on the nature of the compensation, that is, whether additional monetary compensation or psychological compensation (i.e., an apology) is offered.

*Armirotto, V. (2016). How can we best solve your problem? The impact of co-creation of service recovery on complaining customers’ perceptions. Master thesis: KU Leuven, Belgium.

Association of Business Schools (2015). Academic Journal Guide 2015. 54 pages.

*Balaji, M. S., Jha, S., Sengupta, A. S., Krishnan, B. C. (2018) Are cynical customers satisfied differently? Role of negative inferred motive and customer participation in service recovery. Journal of Business Research, 86:109–118.CrossRef

Bijmolt, T. H. A., & Pieters, R. G. M. (2001). Meta-analysis in marketing when studies contain multiple measurements. Marketing Letters, 12, 157–169.CrossRef

Burnett, J. J., & Dune, P. M. (1986). An appraisal of the use of student subjects in marketing research. Journal of Business Research, 14, 329–343.CrossRef

Chan, H., Wan, L. C., & Sin, L. Y. M. (2007). Hospitality service failures: Who will be more dissatisfied? International Journal of Hospitality Management, 26, 531–545.CrossRef

Chang, C.-C., & Chin, Y.-C. (2011). Comparing consumer complaint responses to online and offline environment. Internet Research, 21, 124–137.CrossRef

*Cheung, F. Y. M., To, C. W. M. (2016). A customer-dominant logic on service recovery and customer satisfaction, Management Decision, 54:2524–2543.CrossRef

*Collier, J. E., Breazeale, M., White, A. (2017). Giving back the “self” in self-service: Customer preferences in self-service failure recovery. Journal of Services Marketing, 31:604–617.CrossRef

*Dong, B., Evans, K. R., Zou, S. (2008) The effects of customer participation in co-created service recovery. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 36:123–137.CrossRef

*Dong, B., Sivakumar, K., Evans, K. R., Zou, S. (2016). Recovering coproduced service failures: Antecedents, consequences, and moderators of locus of recovery. Journal of Service Research, 19: 291–306.CrossRef

Dong, B., & Sivakumar, K. (2017). Customer participation in services: domain, scope, and boundaries. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 45, 944–965.CrossRef

Farley, J. U., Lehmann, D. R., & Sawyer, A. (1995). Empirical marketing generalization using meta-analysis. Marketing Science, 14, 36–46.CrossRef

Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A.-G., & Buchner, A. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 175–191.CrossRef

Field, A. (2001). Meta-analysis of correlation coefficients: A Monte Carlo comparison of fixed- and random-effects methods. Psychological Methods, 6, 161–180.CrossRef

Gelbrich, K., & Roschk, H. (2011). A meta-analysis of organizational complaint handling and customer responses. Journal of Service Research, 14, 24–43.CrossRef

*Gohary, A., Hamzelu, B., Alizadeh, H. (2016a) Please explain why it happened! How perceived justice and customer involvement affect post co-recovery evaluations: A study of Iranian online shoppers. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 31:127–142.CrossRef

*Gohary, A., Hamzelu, B., Pourazizi, L., Hanzaee, K. H. (2016b). Understanding effects of co-creation on cognitive, affective and behavioral evaluations in service recovery: An ethnocultural analysis. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 31:182–198.

Grönroos, C. (1988). Service quality: The six criteria of good perceived service quality. Review of Business, 9, 10–13.

*Guo, L., Lotz, S. L., Tang, C., Gruen, T. W. (2016). The role of perceived control in customer value cocreation and service recovery evaluation. Journal of Service Research, 19:39–56.CrossRef

*Hazée, S., Van Vaerenbergh, Y., Armirotto, V. (2017). Co-creating service recovery after service failure: The role of brand equity. Journal of Business Research, 75:101–109.CrossRef

*Heidenreich, S., Wittkowski, K., Handrich, M., Falk, T. (2015) The dark side of customer co-creation: Exploring the consequences of failed co-created services. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43:279–296.

Herzberg, F. (1971). Work and the nature of man. New York: World Publishing.

Hofstede, G. (1997). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind. London: McGraw-Hill.

Hong, Y., Liao, H., Hu, J., & Jiang, K. (2014). Missing link in the service profit chain: A meta-analytic review of the antecedents, consequences, and moderators of service climate. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 98, 237–267.CrossRef

*Huang, H-H. (2016) A study of customer co-recovery from self-oriented and other-oriented perspectives. J Hosp Leis Sport To, 6:1–28.

*Huang, H-H., Wang, J. S., Kung, S. H. (2016) The influence of customer participation in service recovery on overall satisfaction and repurchase intention. Journal National Huwei University Science Technology, 33:1–11.

Hunter, J. E., & Schmidt, F. L. (2004). Methods of meta-analysis: Correcting error and bias in research findings (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.CrossRef

Joireman, J., Grégoire, Y., Devezer, B., & Tripp, T. M. (2013). When do customers offer firms a “second chance” following a double deviation? The impact of inferred firm motives on customer revenge and reconciliation. Journal of Retailing, 89, 315–337.CrossRef

*Joosten, H., Bloemer, J., Hillebrand, B. (2017) Consumer control in service recovery: beyond decisional control. Journal of Service Management, 28:499–519.CrossRef

*Karande, K., Magnini, V.P., Tam, L. (2007) Recovery voice and satisfaction after service failure: An experimental investigation of mediating and moderating factors. Journal of Service Research, 10:187–203.CrossRef

Knox, G., & Van Oest, R. (2014). Customer complaints and recovery effectiveness: A customer base approach. Journal of Marketing, 78, 42–57.CrossRef

*Mattila, A. S. (2010) Do women like options more than men? An examination in the context of service recovery. Journal of Services Marketing, 24:499–508;CrossRef

Murtaugh, P. A. (2002). Journal quality, effect size, and publication bias in meta-analysis. Ecology, 83, 1162–1166.CrossRef

Orsingher, C., Valentini, S., & de Angelis, M. (2010). A meta-analysis of customer satisfaction with complaint handling in services. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 38, 169–186.CrossRef

Payne, A. F., Storbacka, K., & Frow, P. (2008). Managing the co-creation of value. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 36, 83–96.CrossRef

Peterson, R. A., & Brown, S. P. (2005). On the use of beta coefficients in meta-analysis. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 175–181.CrossRef

Peterson, R. A., & Merunka, D. R. (2014). Convenience samples of college students and research reproducibility. Journal of Business Research, 67, 1035–1041.CrossRef

Pick, D., & Eisend, M. (2016). Customer responses to switching costs: A meta-analytic investigation of the moderating influence of culture. Journal of International Marketing, 24, 39–60.CrossRef

*Roggeveen, A. L., Tsiros, M., Grewal, D. (2012) Understanding the co-creation effect: when does collaborating with customers provide a lift to service recovery? Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 40:771–790.CrossRef

Rosenthal, R. (1979). The ‘file-drawer problem’ and tolerance for null results. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 638–641.CrossRef

Rust, R., & Cooil, B. (1994). Reliability measures for qualitative data: Theory and implications. Journal of Marketing Research, 31, 1–14.CrossRef

Rust, R., & Lemon, K. (2001). E-service and the consumer. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 5, 85–101.CrossRef

Sengupta, S., Ray, D., Trendel, O., & Van Vaerenbergh, Y. (2018). The effect of apologies in the global online retail. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 22, 419–445.CrossRef

Sharma, P. (2010). Measuring personal cultural orientations: Scale development and validation. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 38, 787–806.CrossRef

Smith, A. K., Bolton, R. N., & Wagner, J. (1999). A model of customer satisfaction with service encounter involving failure and recovery. Journal of Marketing Research, 36, 356–372.CrossRef

*Talgø, T., Rødsjø, E. L. (2017) You break it, you fix it? Customer participation in service production and service recovery. Master thesis: BI Norwegian Business School, Norway.

Valentine, J. C., Pigott, T. D., & Rothstein, H. R. (2010). How many studies do you need? A primer on statistical power for meta-analysis. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 35, 215–247.CrossRef

Van Vaerenbergh, Y., & Orsingher, C. (2016). Service recovery: An integrative framework and research agenda. Academy of Management Perspectives, 30, 328–346.CrossRef

Van Vaerenbergh, Y., Orsingher, C., Vermeir, I., & Larivière, B. (2014). A meta-analysis of relationships linking service failure attributions to customer outcomes. Journal of Service Research, 17, 381–398.CrossRef

Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2016). Institutions and axioms: An extension and update of service-dominant logic. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 44, 5–23.CrossRef

*Vazquez-Casielles, R., Iglesias, V., Varela-Neira, C. (2017) Co-creation and service recovery process communication: effects on satisfaction, repurchase intentions, and word of mouth. Service Business, 11:321–343.CrossRef

Völckner, F., & Hofmann, J. (2007). The price-perceived quality relationship: A meta-analytic review and assessment of its determinants. Marketing Letters, 18, 181–196.CrossRef

*Xu, Y., Tronvoll, B., Edvardsson, B. (2014a) Recovering service failure through resource integration. Service Industries Journal, 34:1253–1271.CrossRef

*Xu, Y., Marshall, R., Edvardsson, B., Tronvoll, B. (2014b) Show you care: Initiation co-creation in service recovery. Journal of Service Management, 25:369–387.

Titel: Customer participation in service recovery: a meta-analysis
verfasst von: Yves Van Vaerenbergh
Simon Hazée
Annelies Costers
Publikationsdatum: 03.10.2018
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: Marketing Letters / Ausgabe 4/2018
Print ISSN: 0923-0645
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-059X
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11002-018-9470-9

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 4/2018

The featuring phenomenon in music: how combining artists of different genres increases a song’s popularity

Are large portions always bad? Using the Delboeuf illusion on food packaging to nudge consumer behavior

Antecedents of market orientation: marketing CEOs, CMOs, and top management team marketing experience

Narratives of technology consumption in the face of marketplace discrimination

Proud volunteers: the role of self- and vicarious-pride in promoting volunteering

Should donation ads include happy victim images? The moderating role of regulatory focus