A Meta-Analysis of Organizational Complaint Handling and Customer Responses

Abstract

Service recovery is a crucial success factor for organizations. Thus, many studies have addressed the issue of post-complaint behavior. Conducting a meta-analysis, the authors test the following path model: ‘‘organizational responses (compensation, favorable employee behavior, and organizational procedures) → justice perceptions (distributive, interactional, and procedural justice) → post-complaint satisfaction (transaction-specific and cumulative satisfaction) → customer behavioral intentions (loyalty and positive word of mouth [WOM]).’’ The results confirm this model as well as the mediating role of justice perceptions and post-complaint satisfaction. Surprisingly, the results also show that the common contention of distributive justice as the salient driver of service recovery is only true for transaction-specific satisfaction, which in turn reinforces positive WOM. Cumulative satisfaction, however, which is the primary antecedent of customer loyalty, even slightly more depends on interactional justice than on distributive justice. Further, the results show that the relationships between justice perceptions and satisfaction constructs depend on several moderators such as target group, industry, and complaint type. A major managerial implication is the fact that organizations should pay particular attention to distributive justice when complainants are students and to interactional justice when failure is nonmonetary or occurs in service industries. The authors discuss theoretical implications and provide suggestions for future research.

Usage of Social Media Systems in Customer Service Strategies

“…If the differences between input and output are unduly against or in favor of the individual, then feelings of disappointment or anger in the former case and feelings of guilt or regret in the latter case might ensue. Customers who perceive the organizational response to a complaint as relatively fairly distributed, tend to be more satisfied [14,23] and this relation is indicated as EG3 in Figure 1.…”

“…According to the expectancy-disconfirmation theory, customers compare a complaint handling service with their prior expectations. Therefore, we consider satisfaction in terms of its 'transaction-specific component', in contrast to the alternative view of an 'overall' assessment of the company and its services [14].…”

“…However, recent studies have questioned the distinctness of these three justice dimensions [14]. Several studies integrate the dimensions and treat them as a single construct, due to high correlation between the dimensions [15].…”

Managing online service recovery: procedures, justice and customer satisfaction

“…Extant research on offline service failure and recovery recognises employee empathy, politeness and courtesy as key aspects of interactional justice (e.g., Tax et al, 1998;Chebat and Slusarczyk, 2005;Gelbrich and Roschk, 2011). This body of research finds extensive empirical support for the positive impact of interactional justice conveyed by offline service recovery efforts on customer satisfaction (e.g., Blodgett et al, 1997;Smith et al, 1999;del Río-Lanza et al, 2009 The above study shows that customers are less satisfied when interacting with the firm via email, rather than in person or over the phone.…”

Australian Retail Banking Customers’ Perceptions of Time in A Service Recovery Process

“…Distributive justice refers to the perceived fairness of the remedy offered by the service provider (Blodgett, Hill, & Tax, 1997). A large number of studies are available which have investigated the impact of these three elements on customer satisfaction and various behavioural outcomes (for example, Andaleeb, Huda, Akhtar, & Dilshad, 2012;Battaglia, et al 2012;Blodget, et al, 1997;Casado, et al, 2011;Gelbrich & Roschk, 2011;Gustafsson, 2009;del Río-Lanza et al, 2009;and Sabharwal & Soch, 2011).…”