A meta-analysis of satisfaction with complaint handling in services

Abstract

Academics as well as managers have long been interested in the role of satisfaction with complaint handling (SATCOM) in shaping customers' attitudes and repurchasing decisions. This interest has generated a widespread belief that SATCOM is driven by the perception that the complaint handling process is just. To test how SATCOM is modulated by distributive, interactional, or procedural justice, we performed a meta-analysis of 60 independent studies of the antecedents and consequences of SATCOM. Results indicate that SATCOM is affected most by distributive justice, then by interactional justice, and only weakly by procedural justice. We also find that SATCOM mediates the effects of justice dimensions on word-of-mouth. However, contrary to common belief, SATCOM does not mediate the effects of justice dimensions on overall satisfaction and return intent. We draw on our results to suggest several avenues for further research.

Usage of Social Media Systems in Customer Service Strategies

“…distributive, procedural, and interactional justice. This three-dimensional structure was theorized and tested in a meta-analytic framework proposed by Orsingher et al [10]. Distributive justice refers to customer perception regarding the firm's effort to correct the observed problem [11].…”

Do supplier perceptions of buyer fairness lead to supplier sales growth?

“…In spite of the tripartite conceptualization of fairness perceptions in consumer research (distinguishing between distributive, procedural, and interactional justice) (for a comprehensive review see for example Cohen-Charash & Spector, 2001;or Orsingher et al, 2010), interorganizational studies have not considered all three dimensions of justice simultaneously. For instance, Samaha et al (2011) do not distinguish between three dimensions of fairness; Luo (2005) focuses solely on procedural justice; and Kumar et al (1995b), Yilmaz et al (2004), Brown et al (2006), and Griffith et al (2006) focus on procedural and distributive justice (see Table 1).…”

The Relationship between Service Recovery and Patronage Intentions: The Mediating Role of Relationship Quality

“…In 1981 (p. 27), Oliver defines customer satisfaction as "Summary emotional state resulting when the emotion surrounding disconfirmed expectations is coupled with the consumer's prior feelings about the consumption experience" (Andreassen, 2000). Choi and La (2013), suggest that service recovery satisfaction (SRS), sometimes referred to as the complaint handling (Tax et al 1998;Orsingher, Valentini and De Angelis, 2010), is the customer's assessment of how a service failure handled by the service provider. It is also described as the degree to which the consumer has promising or satisfactory feelings toward the provider recovery activities (Chang, 2004).…”