An examination of the emotions that follow a failure of co-creation

Sugathan, Praveen; Ranjan, Kumar Rakesh; Mulky, Avinash G.

doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.04.022

Cited by 28 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 73 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…When making attributions, individuals differ in the extent to which they attribute causes of behaviour internally (i.e., assigning the cause of behaviour to an individual's characteristics) or externally (i.e., assigning the cause of behaviour to the situation the individual is in). The extent to which individuals attribute knowledge hiding internally or externally can affect subsequent experiences of guilt and shame (Sugathan, Ranjan, & Mulky, ; Tracy & Robins, ). To that end, individuals who attribute their knowledge hiding internally might experience guilt and shame more strongly compared to individuals who attribute the hiding of knowledge externally.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Consequences of knowledge hiding: The differential compensatory effects of guilt and shame

Burmeister

Fasbender

Gerpott

2018

J Occupat & Organ Psyc

128

124

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The nature of the consequences of knowledge hiding, defined as an intentional attempt to withhold knowledge that has been requested, and the mechanisms through which knowledge hiding affects outcomes are undertheorized. In this research, we propose that knowledge hiding can evoke guilt and shame in the knowledge hiding perpetrator. We zoom into the three types of knowledge hiding – evasive hiding, playing dumb, and rationalized hiding – and predict that the more deceptive knowledge hiding types, namely evasive hiding and playing dumb, evoke stronger feelings of guilt and shame than rationalized hiding. We further argue that guilt and shame trigger differential emotion‐based reparatory mechanisms, such that guilt induces the motivation to correct one's transgressions through organizational citizenship behaviour (OCB), whereas shame induces the tendency to withdraw after hiding knowledge, as reflected in lower levels of OCB. We test the proposed positive indirect relation between knowledge hiding and OCB via guilt, and the proposed negative indirect relation via shame in a scenario‐based experiment and a two‐wave field study. The studies provided support for most of our hypotheses. We discuss how the proposed emotion pathway can facilitate nuanced theorizing about consequences of knowledge hiding for different types of negative emotions and subsequent compensatory work behaviours. Practitioner points Hiding knowledge from colleagues can lead to experiences of guilt and shame. Playing dumb (in contrast to evasive hiding and rationalized hiding) in particular elicits these negative emotional experiences. Practitioners should therefore aim to prevent knowledge hiding, and especially playing dumb, in organizations. Guilt and shame elicit differential action tendencies in knowledge hiding perpetrators, which entails that negative emotions as a result of playing dumb can sometimes lead to positive behavioural consequences. To effectively manage the consequences of knowledge hiding, practitioners should try to elicit constructive negative emotions (guilt) rather than destructive emotions (shame) as a reaction to employees' knowledge hiding. This can facilitate employees' compensation for their transgressions through organizational citizenship behaviour, rather than withdrawal from the situation.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Consequences of knowledge hiding: The differential compensatory effects of guilt and shame

Burmeister

Fasbender

Gerpott

2018

J Occupat & Organ Psyc

128

124

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…8-9), emotions form an important part of consumption experiences (Holbrook and Hirschman, 1982). Successful co-creation is a source of positive emotions such as pride (Moreau and Herd, 2010), while failed service encounters (value co-destruction) often result in negative emotions (Schoefer and Ennew, 2005), such as guilt (Sugathan et al , 2017) and anger (Smith, 2013). As mentioned earlier, value is also defined as an improvement in system well-being (Vargo et al , 2008), and unpleasant emotions are linked to a negative component of subjective well-being (Diener et al, 1999).…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sources of value co-destruction: Uber customer perspectives

Sthapit

Björk

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose -This study aims to explore the antecedents that generate value co-destruction, the negative outcomes resulting from interactive value formation, in the sharing economy context, particularly taxi services. The focus of the study is on customers' Uber reviews that are written in English and posted online. Three keywords, ''bad'', ''terrible'' and ''awful'', were used to capture online narratives linked to customers' negative experiences with Uber. Out of the 758 online reviews, 75 negative reviews were analysed in this study. Design/methodology/approach -A grounded theory approach was used for data analysis. Findings -Two distinct themes resulted in value co-destruction: Uber drivers' bad behaviour and poor customer service. The managerial implications include that Uber clearly should invest more resources to minimise the negative experiences of its customers by clearly defining the taxi drivers' tasks and responsibilities. In addition, when customers report their dissatisfaction, they should be dealt with promptly and effectively through good customer service.Research limitations/implications -First, the netnography study, by its nature, was restricted to those customers who shared their reviews online. The study did not consider those customers who have not posted their reviews online. Second, the focus of the study was on customer reviews that were written in English. Third, only three keywords (''bad'', ''terrible'' and ''awful'') were used in the data selection process, limiting the number of review posts (75) that were analysed in this study. In addition, even if this study does not produce statistically generalizable findings, the findings are valuable in an analytical sense. Practical implications -From a managerial perspective, Uber clearly should invest more in resources to minimise the negative experiences of its customers (both domestic customers and tourists) by clearly defining the taxi drivers' tasks and responsibilities. If the drivers' tasks are unclear, then customers cannot be served in an effective manner and with consistent service quality. The taxi drivers, regardless of their full-time or part-time work shifts, should ensure that quality services are offered to customers. Providing high-quality service might reduce the number of complaints and result in positive comments and compliments. Originality/value -This study addresses the gap in previous literature by examining customers' negative experiences during the overall service encounter and antecedents of value co-destruction in the context of Uber. This study contributes to a better understanding of value co-destruction within the sharing economy.

show abstract

“…Despite the pervasiveness of co-creation, researchers have shown that as customers get more involved with their own service delivery, inconsistent expectations along with mishaps increase, resulting in higher probabilities of service failures (Heidenreich et al , 2015). While such service failures are inevitable, effective service recovery strategies to overcome co-created failures are heavily underexplored by the academic community (Sugathan et al , 2017a).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Recovering co-created service failures: the missing link of perceived justice and ethicalness

Wei

Ang

Anaza

2019

JSM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Drawing on the fairness theory, this paper aims to propose a conceptual framework that investigates how co-creation in the failed service delivery (coproduction intensity) and co-creation in the service recovery affect customers’ evaluation of the firm’s competence, justice and ethicalness, and ultimately their willingness to co-create in the future. Design/methodology/approach Tax services were chosen as the research context. A consumer panel consisting of individuals who live in the USA and have used tax preparation services within the past year was recruited. The first study explores what happens to customers’ ethical perceptions during a failed co-created service encounter. A secondary study investigates what happens to customers’ ethical perceptions in the event that the failed co-created service is recovered. Findings The findings show that customers’ perceptions of the firm’s abilities and ethics are impeded by coproduction intensity but favorably influenced by co-creation of recovery. Practical implications A sense of ethicalness and fairness is violated when co-created service failure occurs, but fortunately, practitioners can count on engaging customers in the service recovery process as co-creators of the solution to positively alter perceived ethicalness and fairness. Originality/value Failed co-created services represent an under-researched area in the marketing literature. Current investigations of co-created service failures have largely approached the notion of fairness from a perceived justice perspective without referencing ethical judgments. However, fairness is grounded in basic ethical assumptions of normative treatment. This research is among the first to highlight the importance of perceived ethicalness in the context of co-created service failure and recovery.

show abstract

An examination of the emotions that follow a failure of co-creation

Cited by 28 publications

References 73 publications

Consequences of knowledge hiding: The differential compensatory effects of guilt and shame

Consequences of knowledge hiding: The differential compensatory effects of guilt and shame

Sources of value co-destruction: Uber customer perspectives

Recovering co-created service failures: the missing link of perceived justice and ethicalness

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About