Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

On the importance of complaint handling design: a multi-level analysis of the impact in specific complaint situations

Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science volume 38, pages 265–287 (2010)Cite this article

Abstract

Given the large investments required for high-quality complaint handling design, managers need practical guidance in understanding its actual importance for their particular company. However, while prior research emphasizes the general relevance of complaint handling design, it fails to provide a more differentiated perspective on this interesting issue. This study, which is based on an integrative multi-level framework and a dyadic dataset, addresses this important gap in research. Results indicate that the impact of a company’s complaint handling design varies significantly depending on the characteristics of the complaining customers with which the firm has to deal. Further, this paper shows that, contingent on these characteristics, a company’s complaint handling design can shape complainants’ fairness perceptions either considerably or only slightly. Overall, findings suggest that companies should apply an adaptive approach to complaint handling to avoid misallocation of attention, energy, and resources.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Fig. 1

Notes

  1. These findings remain stable when estimating a model that only includes main effects, but no cross-level interaction terms.

  2. Moreover, additional analyses show that for both groups of each customer-related characteristic, the estimate for the effect of complaint handling design on perceived fairness is significant.

  3. While our study focuses on the moderating effects of customer characteristics on the impact of a company’s complaint handling design, it is worth mentioning that the interaction effects in our model (see Table 5) can also be interpreted in the opposite way. Specifically, our study also advances academic understanding by suggesting that a company’s complaint handling design influences the impact of customer characteristics. For example, the higher the quality of company’s complaint handling design, the lower is the negative effect of a customer’s perceived severity of the problem, importance of the product, and attribution of responsibility, respectively, on perceived fairness. Thus, high-quality complaint handling may weaken the impact of customer perceptions of the problem. A similar reasoning can be applied to reinterpreting the other interaction effects.

References

  • Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1993). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions (3rd ed.). Newbury Park: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ailawadi, K. L., Neslin, S. A., & Gedenk, K. (2001). Pursuing the value-conscious consumer: store brands versus national brand promotions. Journal of Marketing, 65(1), 71–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, N. H. (1981). Foundation of information integration theory. New York: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andreassen, T. W. (2000). Antecedents to satisfaction with service recovery. European Journal of Marketing, 34(1/2), 156–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andreassen, T. W. (2001). From disgust to delight: do customers hold a grudge? Journal of Service Research, 4(1), 39–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Armstrong, J. S., & Overton, T. S. (1977). Estimating nonresponse bias in mail surveys. Journal of Marketing Research, 14, 396–402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (1988). On the evaluation of structural equation models. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 16(1), 74–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bearden, W. O., & Oliver, R. L. (1985). The role of public and private complaining in satisfaction with problem resolution. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 19(2), 222–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Belsley, D. A., Kuh, E., & Welsch, R. E. (1980). Regression diagnostics: Identifying influentia data and sources of collinearity. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berry, L. L. (1995). On great service: A framework for action. New York: Free.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bitner, M. J., Booms, B. H., & Tetreault, M. S. (1990). The service encounter: diagnosing favorable and unfavorable incidents. Journal of Marketing, 54(1), 71–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blodgett, J. G., Granbois, D. H., & Walters, R. G. (1993). The effects of perceived justice on complainants’ negative word-of-mouth behavior and repatronage intentions. Journal of Retailing, 69(4), 399–428.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blodgett, J. G., Hill, D., & Tax, S. S. (1997). The effects of distributive, procedural, and interactional justice on postcomplaint behavior. Journal of Retailing, 73, 185–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bolton, R. N. (1998). A dynamic model of the duration of the customer’s relationship with a continuous service provider: the role of satisfaction. Marketing Science, 17(1), 45–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, S. W. (2000). Practicing Best-in-class service recovery. Marketing Management, 9(2), 8–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, S. P., & Beltramini, R. F. (1989). Consumer complaining and word of mouth activities: field evidence. Advances in Consumer Research, 16(1), 9–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bryk, A. S., & Raudenbush, S. W. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods (2nd ed.). Newbury Park: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bush, R. F., & Busch, P. (1981). The relationship of tenure and age to role clarity and its consequences in the industrial salesforce. Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 2(1), 17–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chebat, J.-C., & Kollias, P. (2000). The impact of empowerment on customer contact employees’ roles in service organizations. Journal of Service Research, 3(1), 66–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chebat, J.-C., Davidow, M., & Codjovi, I. (2005). Silent voices. Why some dissatisfied consumers fail to complain. Journal of Service Research, 7(4), 328–342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clemmer, E. C. (1993). An investigation into the relationship of fairness and customer satisfaction with services. In R. Cropanzano (Ed.), Justice in the workplace: Approaching fairness in human resource management (pp. 193–207). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G., & Aiken, L. S. (2003). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (3rd ed.). Mahwah: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conlon, D. E., & Murray, N. M. (1996). Customer perceptions of corporate responses to product complaints: the role of explanations. Academy of Management Journal, 39(4), 1040–1056.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cummings, W. T., Jackson, D. W., & Olstrom, L. L. (1989). Examining product managers’ job satisfaction and performance using selected organizational behavior variables. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 17(2), 147–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dagger, T. S., Danaher, P. J., & Gibbs, B. J. (2009). How often versus how long: the interplay of contact frequency and relationship duration in customer-reported service relationship strength. Journal of Service Research, 11(4), 371–388.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davidow, M. (2003). Organizational responses to customer complaints: what works and what doesn’t. Journal of Service Research, 5(3), 225–250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diehl, K., Kornish, L. J., & Lynch, J. G. (2003). Smart agents: when lower search costs for quality information increase price sensitivity. Journal of Consumer Research, 30, 56–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Folger, R., & Greenberg, J. (1985). Procedural justice: an interpretive analysis of personnel systems. Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, 3, 141–183.

    Google Scholar 

  • Folkes, V. S. (1984). Consumer reactions to product failure: an attributional approach. Journal of Consumer Research, 10, 398–409.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fornell, C., & Bookstein, F. L. (1982). A comparative analysis of two structural equation models. In C. Fornell (Ed.), A second generation of multivariate analysis (pp. 289–324). New York: Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18, 39–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fornell, C., & Wernerfelt, B. (1987). Defensive marketing strategy by customer complaint management: a theoretical analysis. Journal of Marketing Research, 24, 337–346.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fornell, C., Mithas, S., Morgeson, F. V., III, & Krishnan, M. S. (2006). Customer satisfaction and stock prices: high returns, low risk. Journal of Marketing, 70(1), 3–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, M. L., & Churchill, G. A., Jr. (1987). Using consumer perceptions and a contingency approach to improve health care delivery. Journal of Consumer Research, 13(4), 492–510.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ganesan, S. (1994). Determinants of long-term orientation in buyer–seller relationships. Journal of Marketing, 58(2), 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, F. W., & Warren, W. E. (1995). Psychographic constructs and demographic segments. Psychology & Marketing, 12(3), 223–237.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilliland, S. W. (1993). The perceived fairness of selection systems: an organizational justice perspective. Academy of Management Review, 18(4), 694–734.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilly, M. C., & Gelb, B. D. (1982). Post-purchase consumer processes and the complaining consumer. Journal of Consumer Research, 9(3), 323–328.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodwin, C., & Ross, I. (1989). Salient dimensions of perceived fairness in resolution of service complaints. Journal of Consumer Satisfaction, Dissatisfaction, and Complaining Behavior, 2, 87–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodwin, C., & Ross, I. (1992). Consumer responses to service failures: influence of procedural and interactional fairness perceptions. Journal of Business Research, 25(2), 149–163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grainer, M. (2003). Customer care: The multibillion dollar sinkhole. Alexandria: Customer Care Alliance.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg, J., & McCarty, C. (1990). The interpersonal aspects of procedural justice: a new perspective in pay fairness. Labor Law Journal, 41, 580–585.

    Google Scholar 

  • Handy, C. (1994). Understanding organizations (4th ed.). London: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hart, C. W. L., Heskett, J. L., & Sasser, W. E. (1990). The profitable art of service recovery. Harvard Business Review, 68(4), 148–156.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartline, M. D., & Ferrell, O. C. (1996). The management of customer-contact service employees: an empirical investigation. Journal of Marketing, 60(4), 52–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hess, R. L., Ganesan, S., & Klein, N. (2003). Service failure and recovery: the impact of relationship factors on customer satisfaction. Journal of Academy of Marketing Science, 31(2), 127–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Homans, G. C. (1961). Social behavior: Its elementary forms. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World.

    Google Scholar 

  • Homburg, C., & Fürst, A. (2005). How organizational complaint handling drives customer loyalty: an analysis of the mechanistic and the organic approach. Journal of Marketing, 69(3), 95–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Homburg, C., & Fürst, A. (2007). See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil: a study of defensive organizational behavior towards customer complaints. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 35(4), 523–536.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hunt, J. M., & Kernan, J. B. (1991). Consumer reaction to inequitable exchange: the role of causal inferences. The Journal of Social Psychology, 131(5), 685–696.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jarvis, C. B., MacKenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, P. M. (2003). A critical review of construct indicators and measurement model misspecification in marketing and consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 30, 199–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jasso, G. (1980). A new theory of distributive justice. American Sociological Review, 45, 3–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnston, R. (2001). Linking complaint management to profit. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 12(1), 60–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krishnan, S., & Valle, V. A. (1979). Dissatisfaction attributions and consumer complaint behavior. In W. Wilkie (Ed.), Advances in consumer research (4th ed., pp. 445–449). Ann Arbor: Association for Consumer Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kumar, N., Scheer, L. K., & Steenkamp, J.-B. E. M. (1995). The effects of supplier fairness on vulnerable resellers. Journal of Marketing Research, 32(1), 54–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Licata, J. W., Mowen, J. C., Harris, E. G., & Brown, T. J. (2003). On the trait antecedents and outcomes of service worker job resourcefulness. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 31(3), 256–271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lichtenstein, D. R., Ridgway, N. M., & Netemeyer, R. G. (1993). Price perceptions and consumer shopping behavior: a field study. Journal of Marketing Research, 30(2), 234–245.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lind, E. A., & Tyler, T. R. (1988). The social psychology of procedural justice. New York: Plenum.

    Google Scholar 

  • March, J. G., & Simon, H. A. (1993). Organizations (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mattila, A. S. (2001). The effectiveness of service recovery in a multi-industry setting. Journal of Services Marketing, 15(7), 583–596.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maxham, J. G., III, & Netemeyer, R. G. (2003). Firms reap what they sow: the effects of shared values and perceived organizational justice on customers’ evaluations of complaint handling. Journal of Marketing, 67(1), 46–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maxwell, S. (1999). The social norms of discrete consumer exchange: classification and quantification. American Journal of Economics & Sociology, 58(4), 999–1018.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McColl-Kennedy, J. R., Daus, C. S., & Sparks, B. A. (2003). The role of gender in reactions to service failure and recovery. Journal of Service Research, 6(1), 66–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCollough, M. A., Berry, L. L., & Yadav, M. S. (2000). An empirical investigation of customer satisfaction after service failure and recovery. Journal of Service Research, 3, 121–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Narayandas, D., & Kasturi, R. V. (2004). Building and sustaining buyer–seller relationships in mature industrial markets. Journal of Marketing, 68(3), 63–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neter, J., Kutner, M. H., Nachtsheim, C. J., & Wasserman, W. (1996). Applied linear statistical models (4th ed.). Chicago: Irwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oliver, R. (1997). Equity: How consumers interpret fairness. In R. Oliver (Ed.), Satisfaction: A behavioral perspective on the consumer (pp. 193–215). Boston: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olsen, L. L., & Johnson, M. D. (2003). Service equity, satisfaction, and loyalty: from transaction-specific to cumulative evaluations. Journal of Service Research, 5(3), 184–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palmatier, R. W., Scheer, L. K., & Steenkamp, J.-B. (2007). Customer loyalty to whom? Managing the benefits and risks of salesperson-owned loyalty. Journal of Marketing Research, 44(2), 185–199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palmer, A., Beggs, R., & Keown-McMullan, C. (2000). Equity and repurchase intention following service failure. Journal of Services Marketing, 14(6), 513–528.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). Communication and persuasion: Central and peripheral routes to attitude change. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Petty, R. E., Harkins, S. G., & Williams, K. D. (1980). The effects of group diffusion of cognitive effort on attitudes: an information processing view. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38(1), 81–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, L. W., & Sternthal, B. (1977). Age differences in information processing: a perspective on the aged consumer. Journal of Marketing Research, 14(4), 444–457.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raimondo, M. A., Miceli, G., & Costabile, M. (2008). How relationship age moderates loyalty formation: the increasing effect of relational equity on customer loyalty. Journal of Service Research, 11(2), 142–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rao, A. R., & Bergen, M. E. (1992). Price premium variations as a consequence of buyers’ lack of information. Journal of Consumer Research, 19(3), 412–423.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reinartz, W. J., & Kumar, V. (2003). The impact of customer relationship characteristics on profitable lifetime duration. Journal of Marketing, 67, 77–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richins, M. L. (1983). Negative word-of-mouth by dissatisfied consumers: a pilot study. Journal of Marketing, 47(1), 68–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, J. K. (2004). An introductory primer on multilevel and hierarchical linear modelling. Learning Disabilities: A Contemporary Journal, 2(1), 30–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, J. K., & Monaco, J. P. (2006). Effect size measures for the two-level linear multilevel model. San Francisco: American Educational Research Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shuptrine, K. F., & Wenglorz, G. (1981). Comprehensive identification of consumers’ marketplace problems and what they do about them. In K. B. Monroe (Ed.), Advances in consumer research (8th ed., pp. 687–692). Ann Arbor: Association for Consumer Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. A. (1997). Administrative behavior (4th ed.). New York: Free.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singh, J. (1990). A typology of consumer dissatisfaction response styles. Journal of Retailing, 66(1), 57–99.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slama, M. E., & Tashchian, A. (1985). Selected socioeconomic and demographic characteristics associated with purchasing involvement. Journal of Marketing, 49(1), 72–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, A. K., Bolton, R. N., & Wagner, J. (1999). A model of customer satisfaction with service encounters involving failure and recovery. Journal of Marketing Research, 34, 356–372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Snijders, T. A. B., & Bosker, R. J. (1994). Modeled variance in two-level models. Sociological Methods and Research, 22, 342–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sweeney, P. D., & McFarlin, D. B. (1997). Process and outcome: gender differences in the assessment of justice. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 18(1), 83–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • TARP (Technical Assistance Research Program). (1986). Consumer complaint handling in America: An update study (Part II). Washington: Technical Assistance Research Program Institute and United States Office of Consumer Affairs.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tax, S. S., & Brown, S. W. (1998). Recovering and learning from service failure. Sloan Management Review, 40(1), 75–88.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tax, S. S., Brown, S. W., & Chandrashekaran, M. (1998). Customer evaluations of service complaint experiences: implications for relationship marketing. Journal of Marketing, 62, 60–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsiros, M., Mittal, V., & Ross, W. (2004). The role of attributions in customer satisfaction: a reexamination. Journal of Consumer Research, 31(2), 476–483.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walster, E., Berscheid, E., & Walster, G. W. (1973). New directions in equity research. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 25(2), 151–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ward, T., & Dagger, T. S. (2007). The complexity of relationship marketing for service customers. Journal of Services Marketing, 21(4), 281–290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Webster, F. E. (1978). Management science in industrial marketing. Journal of Marketing, 42(1), 21–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weitz, B. A. (1981). Effectiveness in sales interactions: a contingency framework. Journal of Marketing, 45(1), 85–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zajonc, R. B. (1984). On the primacy of affect. American Psychologist, 39, 117–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zeithaml, V. (1985). The new demographics and market fragmentation. Journal of Marketing, 49(3), 64–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zeithaml, V. A., Varadarajan, P. R., & Zeithaml, C. P. (1988). The contingency approach: its foundations and relevance to theory building and research in marketing. European Journal of Marketing, 22(7), 37–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Chair of Marketing I, University of Mannheim, L 5-1, 68131, Mannheim, Germany

    Christian Homburg

  2. Chair of Marketing, University of Erlangen-Nürnberg, Lange Gasse 20, Nürnberg, 90403, Germany

    Andreas Fürst

  3. GfK Chair of Marketing Intelligence, University of Erlangen-Nürnberg, Lange Gasse 20, Nürnberg, 90403, Germany

    Nicole Koschate

Authors
  1. Christian Homburg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Andreas Fürst
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Nicole Koschate
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christian Homburg.

Appendix

Appendix

Table 8 Scale items for construct measures
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Homburg, C., Fürst, A. & Koschate, N. On the importance of complaint handling design: a multi-level analysis of the impact in specific complaint situations. J. of the Acad. Mark. Sci. 38, 265–287 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-009-0172-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-009-0172-y

Keywords

search

Navigation