Academic journal article Journal of Contemporary Management Research

Deterministic Role of Service Recovery in Identifying Tolerance Adequacy Gap and Variation in Service Recovery Impact across the Same

Academic journal article Journal of Contemporary Management Research

Deterministic Role of Service Recovery in Identifying Tolerance Adequacy Gap and Variation in Service Recovery Impact across the Same

Article excerpt

(ProQuest: ... denotes formulae omitted.)

INTRODUCTION

Inherent properties of services embed the seed of service failures which prompt the service firms to initiate service recovery with an objective to arrest possible customer dissatisfaction and migration (Smith and Bolton, 1998; Tax and Brown, 1998) and these failures are detrimental to a firm's sustainability as it may trigger customer defection (Folkes, 1984; Folkes and Kotsos, 1986, Maxham III, 2001) resulting in increase in cost with respect to acquisition of new customers (Hart et al., 1990) and receding profit line (Kelley and Davis, 1994; Smith et al, 1999). These perils compel service providers to initiate service recovery, an attempt to rectify failure in service delivery on technical or other relevant grounds and reassure smooth flow of services to service recipients. Researchers found empirical evidence that effective service recovery may generate higher level of satisfaction (McCollough and Bharadwaj, 1992) popularly phrased as 'recovery-paradox' (McCollough et al., 2000; Smith et al., 1999; Tax et al., 1998) and have also identified customer satisfaction to be a significant determinant to customer retention (CR) (Oliver, 1980; Fornell, 1992; Anderson and Sullivan, 1993, Terblanche, 2006, Hsu, 2008). On the other hand the concept of double deviation effect emphasized on a linear progression of accumulated grievance against a service provider in pre-purchase phase through service failure-recovery period and often resulted in customer migration. Therefore service recovery has emerged as the most critical phase in service transaction following a perceived service failure. Effort behind service recovery has to be considered as determining factor towards cognitive assurance of favourable outcomes following service failure, but, till date, no scalable parameter has been introduced to assess the tolerance adequacy gap of individual customer, which, in turn, seems to affect the disconfirmation paradigm leading to favourable post-failure behaviour. The perception of service-recovery effort and its acceptability may vary from customer to customer with varying degree of tolerance. This notion stimulated the researchers to conceptualize recovery-zone-of-tolerance (RZOT) (Baksi and Parida, 2013) which is apprehended to be the missing moderator between PSR and post-purchase-behaviour.

The RZOT range is also expected to surface tolerance adequacy gap dependent on individual perception of service recovery performance. The hospitality industry has a high degree of close to moderate service encounters between employee and customers making it susceptible to frequent service failures. Observation of McCann (2004) emphasized that hospitality industry is characterized by high degree of competition and comparatively more prone to service failure than other industry. The types of service failures which are quite common to hospitality industry are commitment failures, access-to-service failures, customization-request failures etc. The dyadic interaction between a customer and a hospitality service provider regarding the effort associated with service recovery, therefore, assumes significant proportion considering the desired favourable behavioural response on behalf of the customers.

The objectives of the study were (a) to identify the deterministic role of perceived service recovery (PSR) in identifying the tolerance adequacy gap (TAG), (b) to examine the variability of perceived service recovery performance (PSRP) across recovery-zone-oftolerance (RZOT), (c) to assess the variation of service recovery impact (SRI) across TAG and (d) to test the robustness of the proposed research model. The layout of the paper following introduction, has been restricted to 'literature review and identification of research gap', 'formulation of hypotheses & research model', 'methodology with factor constructs and reliability & validity testing' results and interpretation' and 'implications for theories & practice and future scopes'. …

Search by... Author
Show... All Results Primary Sources Peer-reviewed

Oops!

An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.