Interactional justice is defined by hoffman and

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: ty to adapt to the customer’s recovery needs (Tax et al 1998). Interactional justice is defined by Hoffman and Kelley (2000) as “the manner in which the service recovery process is implemented and the way recovery outcomes are presented”. It has been operationalised by the social aspects of interaction: courtesy and politeness exhibited by personnel, empathy, effort observed in resolving the situation and the firm’s willingness to provide an explanation as to why the harmful situation occurred (Blodgett et al 1997, Tax et al 1998). 5 507-153-1 The hierarchical importance of the components of justice was not subject of unanimity in the academic environment. The study of Chi kin et al. (2003) takes an integrative approach by incorporating perceived justice within the expectationdisconfirmation process. Specifically, they measure both recovery expectations and perceived performance in terms of perceived justice and treat these equity-based measures as constructs in the expectancy-disconfirmation framework. The long-term These actions aim to maintain a durable relationship between the service provider and the customer. The most cited model in the investigation of the link between complaint management and relationship marketing is the one of Tax, Brown and Chandreahekaen (1998). Accordingly, satisfaction with service recovery mediates the relation between the components of the perceived justice, the attitudes and the postcomplaint behaviour that play a crucial role in the maintenance and the development of the relationship. When dissatisfaction with complaint management increases, the trust and the consumer's commitment to the enterprise decrease. This relation is curbed by the previous experience with the company. The consumer's dissatisfaction caused by the non quality of complaint management damages relationships more seriously when the experience is positive and the expectation is raised. In the opposite case the relation is less damaged. Hoffman and Kelleys (2000) proposed a conceptual framework apprehending the effectiveness of recovery strategies in terms of repurchase intention, loyalty and commitment, trust and W.O.M intentions. A particular attention is paid to the moderator variables susceptible to influence consumer evaluation of service recovery based on perceived justice. These variables are split into two groups: service characteristics (degree of customization, proximity of the relationship and duration of encounter) and customer characteristics (the depth of the relationship, switching cost, and criticality of consumption). II. The process of complaints management in the bank: While considerable progress has been made in the area of service recovery, less emphasis has been placed on the means by which customer complaints are processed. Such neglect has rendered organizations vulnerable to the potential responses of complainants. 6 507-153-1 Based on the studies of Gilly, William and Laura (1991); Mitchell (1993), Tax and Brown (1998); and Hermel (2006), the analysis of the bank complaint management reveals a process of five phases: (1) reception of complaint, (2) selection of complaint, (3) analysis of complaint, (4) formulation of reply and (5) track of trends and use of information to improve service process. This process reflect the two types of control proposed by Vanderleest and Borna (1988, p 16). Step 1, 2, 3, and 4 show the “on going complaint control” which involves continual monitoring of the complaint process to ensure that claims are handled in accordance with written policy) and step 5 show the “strategic complaint control” which entails a critical review of the entire complaint programme on a regular basis, e.g yearly. 1. Reception of the complaint: The service in charge of treatment of complaints receives the written complaints from top management because letters are addressed to the general manager. A delivery notice is sent to the customer to inform him of the reception of the complaint and of the investigations that are in process. Mitchell (1993) and Vanderleest and Borna (1988) affirm that prompt acknowledgement to a complaint actually decreases the level of anxiety experienced by the complainant and reassures the consumer that complaint has actually been received. Best practices revealed that inconvenient processes are based on the principle that “the customer is always wrong” (Tax and Brown 1998, pp 81). 2. Selection of complaint: The first task is the qualification of the level of treatment to be carried out. Complaints of level 1 are solved within the service itself while those of level 2 are transmitted to the service concerned with the complaint (production, total management of the risks, electronic money, accountancy, general, legal and tax problems, account and contentious issues, foreign issues, treasury portfolio and compensation, control, etc.). 3. Analysis of complaint: The complaint, once col...
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 01/06/2013 for the course ECON 232 taught by Professor Anonymous during the Spring '12 term at Alaska Pacific University.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online