管理服务关闭:现金退款还是凭证?

IF 5.9 2区 管理学 Q1 BUSINESS
Rachel R. Chen , Eitan Gerstner , Daniel Halbheer , Paolo Roma
{"title":"管理服务关闭:现金退款还是凭证?","authors":"Rachel R. Chen ,&nbsp;Eitan Gerstner ,&nbsp;Daniel Halbheer ,&nbsp;Paolo Roma","doi":"10.1016/j.ijresmar.2022.11.002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Service shutdowns—extended disruptions of operations—caused by exogenous events are on the rise. Such shutdowns pose major challenges for service providers, customers, and regulators. Providers prefer vouchers as a means of service recovery to limit bankruptcy risk, whereas customers demand cash refunds or vouchers that include a generous bonus. Regulators, on the other hand, insist that customers must be granted the right to be reimbursed in cash. This paper shows that a zero bonus is optimal under the voucher-only strategy, whereas the provider should always include a positive bonus with the voucher under the hybrid strategy that allows customers to choose between the cash refund and voucher options. Surprisingly, despite its higher flexibility in service recovery design, the hybrid strategy can be dominated by the voucher-only strategy in terms of profit and welfare. Moreover, we show that the ranking of strategies differs across the two important dimensions of expected profit and survival under shutdown. Finally, we study competition among providers and show that a high-quality provider is more likely to use cash-back as the service recovery strategy than its low-quality competitor.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48298,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Research in Marketing","volume":"40 2","pages":"Pages 294-315"},"PeriodicalIF":5.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Managing service shutdowns: Cash refunds or vouchers?\",\"authors\":\"Rachel R. Chen ,&nbsp;Eitan Gerstner ,&nbsp;Daniel Halbheer ,&nbsp;Paolo Roma\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ijresmar.2022.11.002\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Service shutdowns—extended disruptions of operations—caused by exogenous events are on the rise. Such shutdowns pose major challenges for service providers, customers, and regulators. Providers prefer vouchers as a means of service recovery to limit bankruptcy risk, whereas customers demand cash refunds or vouchers that include a generous bonus. Regulators, on the other hand, insist that customers must be granted the right to be reimbursed in cash. This paper shows that a zero bonus is optimal under the voucher-only strategy, whereas the provider should always include a positive bonus with the voucher under the hybrid strategy that allows customers to choose between the cash refund and voucher options. Surprisingly, despite its higher flexibility in service recovery design, the hybrid strategy can be dominated by the voucher-only strategy in terms of profit and welfare. Moreover, we show that the ranking of strategies differs across the two important dimensions of expected profit and survival under shutdown. Finally, we study competition among providers and show that a high-quality provider is more likely to use cash-back as the service recovery strategy than its low-quality competitor.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48298,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Research in Marketing\",\"volume\":\"40 2\",\"pages\":\"Pages 294-315\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Research in Marketing\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016781162200074X\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Research in Marketing","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016781162200074X","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

由外部事件引起的服务中断——运营的长期中断——正在增加。这种关闭给服务提供商、客户和监管机构带来了重大挑战。供应商更喜欢将代金券作为一种服务回收手段,以限制破产风险,而客户则要求现金退款或包括丰厚奖金的代金券。另一方面,监管机构坚持认为,客户必须有权获得现金补偿。本文表明,在纯代金券策略下,零奖金是最优的,而在允许客户在现金退款和代金券选项之间进行选择的混合策略下,提供商应始终在代金券中包含正奖金。令人惊讶的是,尽管混合策略在服务恢复设计方面具有更高的灵活性,但在利润和福利方面,它可以被纯代金券策略所主导。此外,我们还表明,在预期利润和关闭状态下的生存这两个重要维度上,策略的排名有所不同。最后,我们研究了供应商之间的竞争,并表明高质量的供应商比低质量的竞争对手更有可能使用现金返还作为服务恢复策略。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Managing service shutdowns: Cash refunds or vouchers?

Service shutdowns—extended disruptions of operations—caused by exogenous events are on the rise. Such shutdowns pose major challenges for service providers, customers, and regulators. Providers prefer vouchers as a means of service recovery to limit bankruptcy risk, whereas customers demand cash refunds or vouchers that include a generous bonus. Regulators, on the other hand, insist that customers must be granted the right to be reimbursed in cash. This paper shows that a zero bonus is optimal under the voucher-only strategy, whereas the provider should always include a positive bonus with the voucher under the hybrid strategy that allows customers to choose between the cash refund and voucher options. Surprisingly, despite its higher flexibility in service recovery design, the hybrid strategy can be dominated by the voucher-only strategy in terms of profit and welfare. Moreover, we show that the ranking of strategies differs across the two important dimensions of expected profit and survival under shutdown. Finally, we study competition among providers and show that a high-quality provider is more likely to use cash-back as the service recovery strategy than its low-quality competitor.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
11.80
自引率
4.30%
发文量
77
审稿时长
66 days
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Research in Marketing is an international, double-blind peer-reviewed journal for marketing academics and practitioners. Building on a great tradition of global marketing scholarship, IJRM aims to contribute substantially to the field of marketing research by providing a high-quality medium for the dissemination of new marketing knowledge and methods. Among IJRM targeted audience are marketing scholars, practitioners (e.g., marketing research and consulting professionals) and other interested groups and individuals.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信