The demand-what-you-want strategy to service recovery: achieving high customer satisfaction with low service failure compensation using anchoring and precision effects
{"title":"The demand-what-you-want strategy to service recovery: achieving high customer satisfaction with low service failure compensation using anchoring and precision effects","authors":"Nathalie Kron, Jesper Björkman, Peter Ek, Micael Pihlgren, Hanan Mazraeh, Benny Berggren, Patrik Sörqvist","doi":"10.1108/jstp-02-2023-0029","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PurposePrevious research suggests that the compensation offered to customers after a service failure has to be substantial to make customer satisfaction surpass that of an error-free service. However, with the right service recovery strategy, it might be possible to reduce compensation size while maintaining happy customers. The aim of the current study is to test whether an anchoring technique can be used to achieve this goal.Design/methodology/approachAfter experiencing a service failure, participants were told that there is a standard size of the compensation for service failures. The size of this standard was different depending on condition. Thereafter, participants were asked how much they would demand to be satisfied with their customer experience.FindingsThe compensation demand was relatively high on average (1,000–1,400 SEK, ≈ $120). However, telling the participants that customers typically receive 200 SEK as compensation reduced their demand to about 800 SEK (Experiment 1)—an anchoring effect. Moreover, a precise anchoring point (a typical compensation of 247 SEK) generated a lower demand than rounded anchoring points, even when the rounded anchoring point was lower (200 SEK) than the precise counterpart (Experiment 2)—a precision effect.Implications/valueSetting a low compensation standard—yet allowing customers to actually receive compensations above the standard—can make customers more satisfied while also saving resources in demand-what-you-want service recovery situations, in particular when the compensation standard is a precise value.","PeriodicalId":47021,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Service Theory and Practice","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Service Theory and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jstp-02-2023-0029","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
PurposePrevious research suggests that the compensation offered to customers after a service failure has to be substantial to make customer satisfaction surpass that of an error-free service. However, with the right service recovery strategy, it might be possible to reduce compensation size while maintaining happy customers. The aim of the current study is to test whether an anchoring technique can be used to achieve this goal.Design/methodology/approachAfter experiencing a service failure, participants were told that there is a standard size of the compensation for service failures. The size of this standard was different depending on condition. Thereafter, participants were asked how much they would demand to be satisfied with their customer experience.FindingsThe compensation demand was relatively high on average (1,000–1,400 SEK, ≈ $120). However, telling the participants that customers typically receive 200 SEK as compensation reduced their demand to about 800 SEK (Experiment 1)—an anchoring effect. Moreover, a precise anchoring point (a typical compensation of 247 SEK) generated a lower demand than rounded anchoring points, even when the rounded anchoring point was lower (200 SEK) than the precise counterpart (Experiment 2)—a precision effect.Implications/valueSetting a low compensation standard—yet allowing customers to actually receive compensations above the standard—can make customers more satisfied while also saving resources in demand-what-you-want service recovery situations, in particular when the compensation standard is a precise value.
期刊介绍:
Formerly known as Managing Service Quality – Impact Factor: 1.286 (2015) – the Journal of Service Theory and Practice (JSTP) aims to publish research in the field of service management that not only makes a theoretical contribution to the service literature, but also scrutinizes and helps improve industry practices by offering specific recommendations and action plans to practitioners. Recognizing the importance of the service sector across the globe, the journal encourages submissions from and/or studying issues from around the world. JSTP gives prominence to research based on real world data, be it quantitative or qualitative. The journal also encourages the submission of strong conceptual and theoretical papers that make a substantive contribution to the scholarly literature in service management. JSTP publishes double-blind peer reviewed papers and encourages submissions from both academics and practitioners. The changing social structures and values, as well as new developments in economic, political, and technological fields are creating sea-changes in the philosophy, strategic aims, operational practices, and structures of many organizations. These changes are particularly relevant to the service sector, as public demand for high standards increases, and organizations fight for both market share and public credibility. The journal specifically addresses solutions to these challenges from a global, multi-cultural, and multi-disciplinary perspective.