An empirical assessment of the influence of customer emotions and contact employee performance on encounter and relationship satisfaction

Abstract

People interested in the research are advised to contact the author for the final version of the publication, or visit the DOI to the publisher's website.• The final author version and the galley proof are versions of the publication after peer review.• The final published version features the final layout of the paper including the volume, issue and page numbers. Link to publication General rightsCopyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights.• Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain • You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal.If the publication is distributed under the terms of Article 25fa of the Dutch Copyright Act, indicated by the "Taverne" license above, please follow below link for the End User Agreement:

Achieving favourable customer outcomes through employee deviance

“…In line with agency theory, which argues that consumers monitor employees' delivery of the promised benefits (Chan et al, 2010), when customers can oversee and at the same time, participate to an exchange which takes place for their own benefit, a stronger positive impact of employee deviance is expected on their affective state. Thus, Encounter satisfaction represents customer's satisfaction about a specific exchange that (s)he has just experienced and results from the evaluation of the events and behaviours associated with this exchange (van Dolen, De Ruyter & Lemmink, 2004). Encounter satisfaction has a central role during service recovery efforts (Siu et al, 2013) and prior work in the area illustrates that perceived justice determines satisfaction during service recovery (Kim, Kim & Kim, 2009), while also acknowledges the differential effect of various types of justice on service recovery satisfaction (Karatepe, 2006).…”

“…Apart from exchange-specific consequences, encounter satisfaction can also affect customers' behavioural intentions (van Dolen et al, 2004;Lin & Liang, 2011). As individuals appreciate the reception of benefits that are valuable to them, they may also 14 reciprocate through actions that contribute to the future well-being of the benefactor, on the basis of social exchange theory (Brady et al, 2012).…”

How do Service Encounters Impact on Relationship Benefits

“…When the service provider succeeds in providing special treatment benefit (e.g., customized service) to its customer based on a high level of face-to-face interaction, each customer is treated as a specialized segment (Dolen et al, 2004). Special treatment benefit is defined in terms of saving time, discount price, or special rewards (Bettencourt and Gwinner, 1996).…”

“…The customer's positively evaluation of the experiences with the different IBSEs, along with the repeated discrete transactions, will create an overall customer perception of satisfaction with IBSE, and then will feel the special treatment benefit (Riley, 2007). Dolen et al (2004) also posited that salespersons supply customerization service according to limited cues from customers (e.g., tone, attitude, clothing, and age). Hotels, for example, capture their customers' preferences by satisfying their customers' special demands.…”

The SAGE Handbook of Social Marketing

“…A tension exists, however, between those who emphasize the need to standardize and reward (at least some) role-prescribed behaviour adhering to role scripts and carrying out management's specifications (Van Dolen et al, 2004;Zeithaml et al, 1988) and those who advocate the need to respond to consumers' demands for adaptability requiring employee judgement and flexibility (Bettencourt and Gwinner, 1996;Kiely, 2005). Bitner et al (1990), for example, identified four types of employee behaviour which would leave the consumer with a memorable, dissatisfying (or satisfying) service encounter: responses to service delivery failure;…”