Journal of Consumer Behavior Essay Example for Free

Journal of Consumer Behavior Essay Consumer complaints and recovery through guaranteeing self-service technology NICHOLA ROBERTSON1*, LISA MCQUILKEN1 and JAY KANDAMPULLY2 1 Deakin University, 221 Burwood Highway, Burwood, Victoria 3125, Australia 2 Ohio State University, 266 Campbell Hall, 1787 Neil Avenue, Columbus, OH 43210, USA ABSTRACT Self-service technologies are shaping the future of consumer behaviour, yet consumers often experience service failure in this context. This conceptual paper focuses on self-service technology failure and recovery. A consumer perspective is taken. Recovering from self-service technology failure is fraught with difficulty, mainly because of the absence of service personnel. The aim of this paper is to present a theoretical framework and associated research propositions in respect to the positive role that service guarantees can play in the context of self-service technology failure and recovery. It contributes to the consumer behaviour domain by unifying the theory pertaining to consumer complaint behaviour, service recovery, specifically consumers’ perceptions of justice, and service guarantees, which are set in a distinctive self-service technology context. It is advanced that service guarantees, specifically multiple attribute-specific guarantees, are associated with consumer voice complaints following self-service technology failure, which is contingent on the attribution of blame in the light of consumers’ production role. Service guarantees are argued to be associated with consumers’ perceptions of just recovery in the selfservice technology context when they promise to fix the problem, compensate only when the problem cannot be remedied, offer a choice of compensation that is contingent on failure severity, afford ease of invocation and collection, and provide a personalised response to failures. Previous classifications of SSTs are used to highlight the applicability of guarantees for different types of SSTs. Managerial implications based on the theoretical framework are presented, along with future research directions. Copyright  © 2011 John Wiley Sons, Ltd. INTRODUCTION The growing application of technology in services has  transformed the way that organisations interact with consumers (Liljander et al., 2006). Self-service technologies (SSTs) are technological interfaces that enable consumers to generate benefits for themselves, without the presence of the organisation’s personnel (Meuter et al., 2000). They enable consumers to take an active role in the production of their service experience. As SSTs are a major force shaping consumer behaviour (Beatson et al., 2006), the implications for both consumers and organisations need to be considered. The failure of SSTs is commonplace (Forbes, 2008; Robertson and Shaw, 2009). SST failure, or consumers’ perception that one or more aspects of SST delivery have not met their expectations, is attributed to poor service and failing technology (Meuter et al., 2000). Failures are inevitable with all services, especially SSTs that introduce new types of failures, such as consumer failures (Forbes, 2008; Meuter et al., 2000). However, SST recovery, e.g., fixing the problem and providing compensation, is generally reported to be poor (Forbes, 2008). While consumers demand a superior response to SST failure, complaints are largely ineffectively handled in this context (Collier and Bienstock, 2006). This is despite the fact that SST failure intensifies the need for recovery because consumers are often remote from service personnel (Collier and Bienstock, 2006). SST providers have ignored consumers, denied responsibility for failure, blamed consumers for the problem, *Correspondence to: Nichola Robertson, Deakin University, 221 Burwood Highway, Burwood, Victoria 3125, Australia. E-mail: [emailprotected]  and provided a generic complaint response (Forbes, 2008; Holloway and Beatty, 2003). Unsurprisingly, consumers might not bother voicing because they believe that it will be useless (Holloway and Beatty, 2003; Snellman and Vihtkari, 2003). If consumers are dissatisfied with an SST encounter and service recovery is perceived to be inept, they will switch and/or spread negative word of mouth and/or mouse (Collier and Bienstock, 2006 ; Dong et al., 2008; Harris et al., 2006a). In the interpersonal service context, it has been argued, albeit rarely, that service guarantees, or explicit promises made by organisations to deliver a certain level of service to satisfy consumers and to remunerate them if the service fails (Hogreve and Gremler, 2009), are an effective recovery tool (Bjà ¶rlin-Lidà ©n and Skà ¥là ©n,  2003; Kashyap, 2001; McColl et al., 2005). In a recovery encounter, service guarantees have been found to provide benefits, such as reducing consumer dissatisfaction, negative word of mouth, and switching (Wirtz, 1998). We argue that in the context of SST failure, service guarantees could act as a surrogate for service personnel who, in the interpersonal service context, encourage consumer complaints and facilitate recovery. Following our extensive review of service guarantees employed in the SST context, it was revealed that guarantees are uncommon in practice for non-Internet SSTs, such as kiosks and interactive voice response (IVR). However, in the Internet context, they appear to be more widespread. For example, guarantees are often used in the context of online banking, where online security, in particular, is guaranteed. They are also prevalent in the hotel context, typically in the form of online price matching guarantees. Therefore, the ‘real-life’ examples of SST guarantees provided throughout this paper are skewed toward Internet SSTs. However, in  N. Robertson et al. guarantees also have the ability to enhance consumers’ perceptions of fairness following failure. SST guarantees indicate justice in a context that is mostly devoid of interpersonal and other external cues, thereby encouraging consumer voice, facilitating service recovery, and, ultimately, retaining the organ isation’s reputation and its consumers. Our paper contributes to the consumer behaviour domain by adding to the underdeveloped literature on consumer complaints, consumer recovery perceptions, and service guarantees in the SST context, in addition to bringing these independent streams of literature together. As SST recovery in practice is reported to be deficient from the consumer perspective, further exploration of this topic is warranted. The remainder of this paper justifies a conceptual framework that describes how guarantees applied to different types of SSTs can encourage consumers to voice following failure and enable organisations to provide just recovery for consumers. We close with theoretical contributions, managerial implications, and an agenda for  future research. developing our propositions, we apply the SST classification schemes developed by Dabholkar (1994) and Meuter et al. (2000) in respect to technology type, purpose, and location. These schemes will be used to highlight the SST contexts that best fit the application of guarantees, which is beyond Internet SSTs. There are two key types of guarantees commonly offered in interpersonal services, unconditional and attributespecific, that also appear to be relevant in the SST setting. An unconditional guarantee covers the core service offering, and consumers are free to invoke it whenever they are dissatisfied (Wirtz et al., 2000). The attribute-specific guarantee is narrower in breadth, covering either a single or multiple service attributes (Van Looy et al., 2003). It is directed to areas within an organisation where consumers perceive that the guarantee adds value (Hart et al., 1992). The attribute-specific guarantee is the type most common in interpersonal services (Van Looy et al., 2003 ). Our review revealed that this also applies to SSTs. For example, Hertz car rental offers its consumers online check-in for rentals. It guarantees that online check-in enables consumers to pick up a rental vehicle within 10 minutes or less. If it fails to fulfil this specific promise, consumers are credited $50. In another example, match.com, an online dating service, guarantees via its ‘Make Love Happen Guarantee’, that if consumers do not find someone special in six months of using its site, it will provide them with six months free service. In the interpersonal service context, consumers have been found to prefer attribute-specific guarantees when they consider invoking the guarantee, ‘. . . probably for their clarity and manifest nature’ (McDougall et al., 1998: 289). We further argue that in the SST context, generally devoid of service personnel and, therefore, with reduced opportunities for consumer monitoring, the clarity of an attribute-specific guara ntee is less likely to attract consumer abuse (McCollough and Gremler, 2004). Therefore, we advocate and assume for the remainder of this paper an attribute-specific guarantee. This can cover multiple SST attributes, which is referred to as a multiple attribute-specific guarantee. For example, BestPrintingOnline.com, an online printing service, guarantees both the quality of its product and on-time  delivery. This type of guarantee provides consumers with the opportunity to complain about several SST problems via guarantee invocation (Bjà ¶rlin-Lidà ©n and Skà ¥là ©n, 2003). In the context of service recovery, the examination of service guarantees has been scarce, and the use of service guarantees in the SST context has not been examined before. This is confirmed by Hogreve and Gremler (2009) in their review of the past 20years of service guarantee research. To begin to address these gaps, our paper conceptualises the role of service guarantees in the SST failure and recovery context from the consumer perspective. We consider different types of SSTs in developing our propositions. We argue that SST guarantees encourage consumers to voice their complaints via guarantee invocation in the absence of service personnel. In line with the call for research examining the justice dimensions (i.e., distributive, procedural, and interactional justice) of service recovery in the SST context (Forbes et al., 2005), we propose that SST Copyright  © 2011 John Wiley Sons, Ltd. CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK The conceptual framework proposed (see Figure 1) is grounded in the theory pertaining to service guarantees, consumer voice, attribution theory, and justice theory. In justifying the framework, the distinctive characteristics of the SST context were considered, including the requirement of consumer co-production that is independent of service personnel, a lack of interpersonal interaction with service personnel, and consumers being obliged to interface and interact with technology (Robertson and Shaw, 2009). When studying SSTs, it is important to distinguish meaningfully between their types (Meuter et al., 2000). In terms of categorising SSTs, two key classification schemes can be drawn. The most cited classification scheme is that proposed by Dabholkar (1994). Her classification scheme considers the following variables: (i) who delivers the service (degree and level of consumer participation); (ii) where the service is delivered (location of the SST, i.e. remote, such as IVR or onsite, such as kiosks); and (iii) how the service is delivered (technology type, i.e. Internet and non-Internet, such as kiosks and IVR). More recently, Meuter et al. (2000) proposed a similar classification of SSTs. As per Dabholkar’s (1994) scheme, they included the different types of technologies that organisations use to interface with consumers (i.e.,  Internet and non-Internet) and the purpose of the technology from the viewpoint of consumers, that is, what consumers accomplish from using the technology (i.e., transactions and/or customer service).

Essay --

Taking a Stand Not since the start of the 1994/95 football season have we seen standing areas in the top two divisions of the English football league. But yet much like the movie ‘Jurassic Park’ these stands are coming back, without the death and dinosaurs this time however. The cost of ticket prices are now ridiculously high especially considering the economic problems we are in. Average ticket prices in the Premier League are the highest within the four major European leagues, the others being La Liga, Bundesliga and Serie A. The average ticket price of a Premier League game is  £28.30, this is a huge price to pay to see a game of football. This compared to the average price of a ticket to a Bundesliga football match which is only  £10, clearly shows the just how shocking the gulf in prices are. However many clubs can claim that this influx of cash each week is needed to support the ever growing maintenance costs of all seated stadiums and to support the club financially at the s ame time. So if only there was a way to lower the prices yet allow the club to make more money from match attendances. Well my friends I think I have found the cure to this disease. The solution lies in the return of standing areas to football grounds. Now these standing areas would not be the same dangerous, hooliganism plagued standing areas of old; no they would be cheap, safe standing areas. Introducing safe standing areas would lower ticket prices and season tickets dramatically; this can be proven by looking at one of the largest football clubs in the world, Bayern Munich. You would expect a club of such magnitude to have season ticket prices as high as the moon, but you’d be wrong. The lowest costing season ticket for the standing area is only  £150... ...s a credit not only German football but standing areas as well. The premier league should be looking over its shoulder, for everyday they waste squabbling over what to do the Bundesliga gets stronger and will soon be challenging to take over the title of ‘Best League in the World’. Even the lousy, misery filled stadiums of the horrific Scottish Premier League (SPL) have followed Germanys lead, by dropping its ban against standing areas. This shows just how far behind the apparently almighty Premier League is, that essentially an amateur league is further ahead than it is. Fortunately the situation is looking brighter as supporters groups from 12 Premier League clubs have confirmed they are backing a trial for standing areas and despite the fact that progress is slow, the wheels are in motion and it is only a matter of time before the momentum begins to build.

Battle of Monmouth

June of 1778, General Washington is planning to attack General Sir Henry Clinton and his troops as they march from Philadelphia to New York. Washington sent 5,000 men with Major General Charles Lee to attack the British rear guard. Lee is forced to retreat, but Washington is ready for the British with the main army. In the end the both sides had claimed victory. Near Monmouth County Courthouse, the battle was fought on June 28, 1778. The weather was so hot on the day of the battle that many soldiers suffered from heat stroke.Many of Washington’s officers favored his plans to attack General Clinton, but Major General Lee was against it. Lee felt that after their alliance with the French, that they shouldn’t attack the British unless they have overwhelming superiority. Washington decided to send 4,000 men to attack Clintons rear guard, Lee turned down command of the force. After Washington raised the amount of men to 5,000, Lee demanded to be given command. Lee was given strict orders to hold a meeting to determine the plan of attack with his officers.During the meeting, Lee told the officers to be alert for orders during the battle instead of planning it out. When they encountered the British, Lee quickly lost control. After this the British moved to flank Lee’s men, when Lee saw this he ordered a retreat. Washington had been bringing the main army up when he saw Lee’s forces retreating. Washington located Lee and dismissed him after not receiving a satisfactory answer as to what had happened. Washington rallied Lee’s men and held off the British just long enough to set positions in the west. After fighting till sometime in the late afternoon, the British retreated.Washington hoped to pursue but his men were exhausted from fighting all day in the heat. The Battle of Monmouth was the last major battle fought in the north during the war. After the battle the British had held up in New York and focused on the southern colonies. Le e requested a court martial to prove his innocence from any wrong doings after the battle. Washington then filed formal charges against Lee, where he was found guilty and suspended. During the Battle a woman who was bringing water to American artillery men is said to of taken over firing for her husband when he had fallen.

Platos Atlantis as Told in His Socratic Dialogues

The original story of the lost island of Atlantis comes to us from two Socratic dialogues called Timaeus and Critias, both written about 360 BCE by the Greek philosopher Plato. Together the dialogues are a festival speech, prepared by Plato to be told on the day of the Panathenaea, in honor of the goddess Athena. They describe a meeting of men who had met the previous day to hear Socrates describe the ideal state. A Socratic Dialogue According to the dialogues, Socrates asked three men to meet him on this day: Timaeus of Locri, Hermocrates of Syracuse, and Critias of Athens. Socrates asked the men to tell him stories about how ancient Athens interacted with other states. The first to report was Critias, who told how his grandfather had met with the Athenian poet and lawgiver  Solon, one of the Seven Sages. Solon had been to Egypt where priests had compared Egypt and Athens and talked about the gods and legends of both lands. One such Egyptian story was about Atlantis. The Atlantis tale is part of a  Socratic dialogue, not a historical treatise. The story is preceded by an account of Helios the sun gods son Phaethon yoking horses to his fathers chariot and then driving them through the sky and scorching the earth. Rather than exact reporting of past events, the Atlantis story describes an impossible set of circumstances which were designed by Plato to represent how a miniature utopia failed and became a lesson to us defining the proper behavior of a state. The Tale According to the Egyptians, or rather what Plato described Critias reporting what his grandfather was told by Solon who heard it from the Egyptians, once upon a time, there was a mighty power based on an island in the Atlantic Ocean. This empire was called Atlantis, and it ruled over several other islands and parts of the continents of Africa and Europe. Atlantis was arranged in concentric rings of alternating water and land. The soil was rich, said Critias, the engineers technically accomplished, the architecture extravagant with baths, harbor installations, and barracks. The central plain outside the city had canals and a magnificent irrigation system. Atlantis had kings and a civil administration, as well as an organized military. Their rituals matched Athens for bull-baiting, sacrifice, and prayer. But then it waged an unprovoked imperialistic war on the remainder of Asia and Europe. When Atlantis attacked, Athens showed its excellence as the leader of the Greeks, the much smaller city-state the only power to stand against Atlantis. Alone, Athens triumphed over the invading Atlantean forces, defeating the enemy, preventing the free from being enslaved, and freeing those who had been enslaved. After the battle, there were violent earthquakes and floods, and Atlantis sank into the sea, and all the Athenian warriors were swallowed up by the earth. Is Atlantis Based on a Real Island? The Atlantis story is clearly a parable: Platos myth is of two cities which compete with each other, not on legal grounds but rather cultural and political confrontation and ultimately war. A small but just city (an Ur-Athens) triumphs over a mighty aggressor (Atlantis). The story also features a cultural war between wealth and modesty, between a maritime and an agrarian society, and between an engineering science and a spiritual force. Atlantis as a concentric-ringed island in the Atlantic which sank under the sea is almost certainly a fiction based on some ancient political realities. Scholars have suggested that the idea of Atlantis as an aggressive barbarian civilization is a reference to either Persia or Carthage, both of them military powers who had imperialistic notions. The explosive disappearance of an island might have been a reference to the eruption of Minoan Santorini. Atlantis as a tale really should be considered a myth, and one that closely correlates with Platos notions of The Republic examining the deteriorating cycle of life in a state. Sources DuÃ… ¡anic S. 1982. Platos Atlantis. LAntiquità © Classique 51:25-52.Morgan KA. 1998. Designer History: Platos Atlantis Story and Fourth-Century Ideology. The Journal of Hellenic Studies 118:101-118.Rosenmeyer TG. 1956. Platos Atlantis Myth: Timaeus or Critias? Phoenix 10(4):163-172.