Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Hurting or helping? The effect of service agents’ workplace ostracism on customer service perceptions

  • Original Empirical Research
  • Published:
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Extant research confirms the importance of cocreating value with customers in service marketing, yet little is known about the impact of service agents’ work experiences on customers’ service perceptions. This research examines how service agents’ workplace ostracism from different sources (supervisors versus coworkers) influences customers’ perceived coproduction value, perceived service performance, and actual purchases. Three laboratory experiments and one survey reveal a double-edged sword effect of workplace ostracism and its contingency such that (1) supervisor ostracism reduces customers’ perceived control value in customer–agent coproduction through threatening service agents’ efficacy needs when the agents experience low servicing empowerment; (2) coworker ostracism enhances customers’ perceived relational value in coproduction through threatening service agents’ relational needs when they expect a long-term relationship with customers; and (3) customers’ perceived control and relational values increase their perceived service performance, and customer relational value also increases the amount of purchases. Our findings reveal that service agents’ workplace ostracism may actually help or harm customers’ service perceptions, depending on the source of ostracism. The results provide significant implications for how organizations can better manage employees’ perceived ostracism in the workplace and strategically improve customers’ experience in service coproduction with excluded agents.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. We base our conceptualization of self-esteem, as a type of threatened relational need, on the theoretical foundation of Williams’s (2007) and other researchers’ (e.g., Bernstein et al. 2010; Lee and Shrum 2012) work. We acknowledge that self-esteem also can relate to efficacy. However, a review of prior literature shows that self-esteem and efficacy differ conceptually on several dimensions. Gardner and Pierce (1998) suggest that self-esteem can be defined as a personal judgment of worthiness, whereas self-efficacy refers to a belief about one’s own ability to execute a future action. Moreover, self-esteem represents a self-perception about competence and value, whereas self-efficacy reflects beliefs about performance ability. These two concepts also differ in their time perspectives (i.e., current assessment of the self vs. future assessment of performance). In addition, the empirical results of our factor analyses reveal the discriminant validity of this self-esteem construct, relative to threatened efficacy needs. We therefore categorize self-esteem as a relational need. We thank an anonymous reviewer for raising this concern.

  2. Fictitious participating partners and preprogrammed conversations are effective in manipulating ostracism. For example, Williams et al. (2000) manipulate ostracism using a “cyberball” game, in which the participants play a virtual ball-tossing game with other two fictitious players online.

  3. To enhance the realism of this online group discussion, we preset the greetings from the four fictitious staff members: one greeting appeared immediately, and then another greeting appeared as the participant was writing his or her own introduction. When the participant finished his or her input, the greetings from the third and fourth fictitious staff members arrived. This procedure enabled the focal participant to become familiar with the four staff members and helped strengthen the perception that the other staff members were coworkers. Web Appendix A provides screenshots from this experiment.

  4. Specifically, participants read the following: “Albert is only responsible for the t-shirt codesign task, and will not be available for further interactions with you. You are expected to contact the experimenter for any further questions rather than Albert.”

  5. In the insurance industry, some customers meet their agent sporadically; to facilitate fresh recall of recent interactions, we asked agents to select customer respondents whom they had visited in the previous year.

  6. We attribute this relatively high response rate to three reasons. First, we received generous support from the top management of this organization, and we promised a brief report of our findings on request. Second, all respondents were told that their participation was voluntary and essential for improving insurance services. We assured them that their responses would be kept confidential, with only aggregated data used for the analyses. All envelopes were sealed and collected by the researchers. Third, we provided a cash voucher of HK$80 and HK$20 for each completed service agent and customer questionnaire, respectively.

  7. The mean of 2.5 refers to customers’ relationship length with the service agents, not with the company.

  8. We thank an anonymous reviewer for this suggestion.

  9. We thank an anonymous reviewer for suggesting that we control for the employees’ personality characteristics and customers’ previous purchase amounts.

  10. Our study design and statistical controls provided the two main ways we controlled for potential common method bias (Podsakoff et al. 2003). In terms of the study design, we (a) assured respondents of their anonymity and confidentiality and emphasized that there were no right or wrong answers, which helps reduce the possibility of bias due to self-presentation (Singh 2000); (b) collected data from multiple sources, such that the exogenous variables, mediators, and moderators were rated by service agents, whereas the key dependent variables were rated by customers and supervisors; and (c) pretested the questionnaire with three marketing research experts, ten company managers, and five customers to avoid any flaws in the structure, question sequence, wording, or ambiguous or unfamiliar terms. For the statistical control, we used the general factor covariate technique to estimate possible method effects. After we partialled out an unrotated factor (the best approximation of common method variance if it is a general factor on which all variables load), the factor loadings all remained significant and valid. Then we applied a marker variable technique (Bagozzi 2011), using the item, “If the company is organizing a donation activity for charity purpose, how likely are you to donate?” (7-point scale), which should be conceptually unrelated to both our predictors and the criterion variables. All coefficients remained statistically significant after we controlled for this marker variable. In addition, common method bias is less of a concern for studies with significant interaction effects, because these effects indicate that respondents did not unthinkingly rate all items as either high or low.

  11. We also applied supervisor-rated service performance in the analysis (e.g., Chan et al. 2010), using the item of “Overall, the service performance of this agent in the past twelve months is…” (1 = “poor,” 5 = “excellent”). The results remained unchanged.

  12. We performed additional analyses in which we removed the self-esteem items from the threatened relational needs construct and reran our analyses. The results remained unchanged (see Web Appendix B). To maintain the solid theoretical foundation provided by Williams (2007) and other researchers (e.g., Bernstein et al. 2010; Lee and Shrum 2012), we kept self-esteem as a subcategory of threatened relational needs. We thank an anonymous reviewer for raising this question.

  13. We split the ostracism constructs into active criticism and passive neglect, for both supervisors and coworkers, then performed regressions to examine the effects on threatened efficacy and relational needs. The pattern of findings generally matched our hypotheses that coworker ostracism exerted more impacts on threatened relational needs, whereas supervisor ostracism had more influence on threatened efficacy needs. We also noted though that active criticism appeared to influence threatened relational needs more, whereas passive neglect seemed to influence threatened efficacy needs more. The differentiation between active criticism and passive neglect falls outside the scope of our study, but we present some additional findings in Web Appendix C. This area deserves further in-depth investigation. We thank an anonymous reviewer for this suggestion.

References

  • Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bagozzi, R. P. (2011). Measurement and meaning in information systems and organizational research: Methodological and philosophical foundations. MIS Quarterly, 35(2), 261–292.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117(3), 497–529.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bendapudi, N., & Leone, R. P. (2003). Psychological implications of customer participation in co-production. Journal of Marketing, 67(January), 14–28.

  • Benet-Martínez, V., & John, O. P. (1998). Los Cinco Grandes across cultures and ethnic groups: Multitrait-multimethod analyses of the big five in Spanish and English. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75(3), 729–750.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bentler, P. M., & Chou, C.-P. (1987). Practical issues in structural modeling. Sociological Methods & Research, 16(1), 78–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bernstein, M. J., Sacco, D. F., Brown, C. M., Young, S. G., & Claypool, H. M. (2010). A preference for genuine smiles following social exclusion. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46(1), 196–199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bettencourt, L. A. (1997). Customer voluntary performance: customers as partners in service delivery. Journal of Retailing, 73(3), 383–406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blazevic, V., & Lievens, A. (2008). Managing innovation through customer coproduced knowledge in electronic services: an exploratory study. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 36(1), 138–151.

  • Brislin, R. W. (1980). Translation and content analysis of oral and written material. In H. C. Triandis & J. W. Berry (Eds.), Handbook of cross-cultural psychology (pp. 398–444). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burger, J. M. (1989). Negative reactions to increases in perceived personal control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56(2), 246–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carter-Sowell, A. R., Chen, Z., & Williams, K. D. (2008). Ostracism increases social susceptibility. Social Influence, 3(3), 143–153.

  • Chan, K. W., & Wan, E. W. (2012). How can stressed employees deliver better customer services: the underlying self-regulation depletion mechanism. Journal of Marketing, 76(January), 119–137.

  • Chan, K. W., & Lam, W. (2011). The trade-off of servicing empowerment on employees’ service performance: examining the underlying motivation and workload mechanisms. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 39(4), 609–628.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chan, K. W., Yim, C. K., & Lam, S. S. (2010). Is customer participation in value creation a double-edged sword? Evidence from professional financial services across cultures. Journal of Marketing, 74(3), 48–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chapman, D. W., & Carter, J. F. (1979). Translation procedures for the cross cultural use of measurement instruments. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 1(3), 71–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crosby, L. A., Evans, K. A., & Cowles, D. (1990). Relationship quality in services selling: an interpersonal influence perspective. Journal of Marketing, 54(3), 68–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cross, S. E., & Madson, L. (1997). Models of the self: self-construals and gender. Psychological Bulletin, 122(1), 5–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dabholkar, P. (1990). How to improve perceived service quality by improving customer participation. Developments in Marketing Science, 13, 483–487.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York: Plenum.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Donthu, N., & Yoo, B. (1998). Cultural influences on service quality expectations. Journal of Service Research, 1(2), 178–186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ekinci, Y., & Dawes, P. L. (2009). Consumer perceptions of frontline service employee personality traits, interaction quality, and consumer satisfaction. Service Industries Journal, 29(4), 503–521.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fang, E., Palmatier, R. W., & Evans, K. R. (2008). Influence of customer participation on creating and sharing of new product value. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 36(3), 322–336.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferris, D. L., Brown, D. J., Berry, J. W., & Lian, H. (2008). The development and validation of the workplace ostracism scale. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(6), 1348–1366.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fleming, J. H., Coffman, C., & Harter, J. K. (2005). Manage your human sigma. Harvard Business Review, 83(7), 106–114.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gardner, D. G., & Pierce, J. L. (1998). Self-esteem and self-efficacy within the organizational context an empirical examination. Group & Organization Management, 23(1), 48–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gardner, W. L., Pickett, C. L., & Brewer, M. B. (2000). Social exclusion and selective memory: how the need to belong influences memory for social events. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26(4), 486–496.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenglass, E. R., & Burke, R. J. (1988). Work and family precursors of burnout in teachers: sex differences. Sex Roles, 18(3–4), 215–229.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis. New York: The Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heide, J. B., & Miner, A. S. (1992). The shadow of the future: effects of anticipated interaction and frequency of contact on buyer-seller cooperation. Academy of Management Journal, 35(2), 265–291.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heskett, J. L., Jones, T. O., Loveman, G. W., Sasser, W. E., & Schlesinger, L. A. (1994). Putting the service-profit chain to work. Harvard Business Review, 72(2), 164–174.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hitlan, R. T., & Noel, J. (2009). The influence of workplace exclusion and personality on counterproductive work behaviours: an interactionist perspective. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 18(4), 477–502.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hitlan, R. T., Cliffton, R. J., & DeSoto, M. C. (2006). Perceived exclusion in the workplace: the moderating effects of gender on work-related attitudes and psychological health. North American Journal of Psychology, 8, 217–236.

    Google Scholar 

  • Homburg, C., & Stock, R. M. (2004). The link between salespeople’s job satisfaction and customer satisfaction in a business-to-business context: a dyadic analysis. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 32(2), 144–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hui, M. K., Au, K., & Fock, H. (2004). Empowerment effects across cultures. Journal of International Business Studies, 35(1), 46–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jaworski, B. J., & Kohli, A. K. (1991). Supervisory feedback: alternative types and their impact on salespeople's performance and satisfaction. Journal of Marketing Research, 28(May), 190–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (1993). LISREL 8: Structural equation modeling with the SIMPLIS command language. Mooresville: Scientific Software International.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kohli, A. K., & Jaworski, B. J. (1994). The influence of coworker feedback on salespeople. Journal of Marketing, 58(4), 82–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leary, M. R., Tambor, E. S., Terdal, S. K., & Downs, D. L. (1995). Self-esteem as an interpersonal monitor: the sociometer hypothesis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68(3), 518–530.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, J., & Shrum, L. (2012). Conspicuous consumption versus charitable behavior in response to social exclusion: a differential needs explanation. Journal of Consumer Research, 39(3), 530–544.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leung, A. S., Wu, L., Chen, Y., & Young, M. N. (2011). The impact of workplace ostracism in service organizations. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 30(4), 836–844.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, X. Y., & Wang, J. (2013). Abusive supervision and organizational citizenship behaviour: is supervisor–subordinate guanxi a mediator? International Journal of Human Resource Management, 24(7), 1471–1489.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malhotra, N. K., Ulgado, F. M., Agarwal, J., & Baalbaki, I. B. (1994). International services marketing: a comparative evaluation of the dimensions of service quality between developed and developing countries. International Marketing Review, 11(2), 5–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maner, J. K., DeWall, C. N., Baumeister, R. F., & Schaller, M. (2007). Does social exclusion motivate interpersonal reconnection? Resolving the “porcupine problem.”. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(1), 42–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martinez, M. (2012). What factors are associated with a school’s high level of organizational citizenship behavior? The case of a middle school staff that goes above and beyond. Doctoral dissertation, Department of Educational Leadership, San Diego State University.

  • Mead, N. L., Baumeister, R. F., Stillman, T. F., Rawn, C. D., & Vohs, K. D. (2011). Social exclusion causes people to spend and consume strategically in the service of affiliation. Journal of Consumer Research, 37(5), 902–919.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Molden, D. C., Lucas, G. M., Gardner, W. L., Dean, K., & Knowles, M. L. (2009). Motivations for prevention or promotion following social exclusion: being rejected versus being ignored. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96(2), 415–431.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mullen, M. R. (1995). Diagnosing measurement equivalence in cross-national research. Journal of International Business Studies, 26(3), 573–596.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muller, D., Judd, C. M., & Yzerbyt, V. Y. (2005). When moderation is mediated and mediation is moderated. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89(6), 852–863.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Reilly, J., & Robinson, S. L. (2009). The negative impact of ostracism on thwarted belongingness and workplace contributions. In Academy of Management Proceedings (pp. 1–7). Chicago: Academy of Management.

  • O’Reilly, J., Robinson, S. L., Berdahl, J. L., & Banki, S. (2014). Is negative attention better than no attention? The comparative effects of ostracism and harassment at work. Organization Science, 26(3), 774–793.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prahalad, C. K., & Ramaswamy, V. (2000). Co-opting customer competence. Harvard Business Review, 78(1), 79–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramirez, R. (1999). Value co-production: intellectual origins and implications for practice and research. Strategic Management Journal, 20(1), 49–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reynolds, K. L., & Harris, L. C. (2009). Dysfunctional customer behavior severity: an empirical examination. Journal of Retailing, 85(3), 321–335.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, S. L., O’Reilly, J., & Wang, W. (2013). Invisible at work an integrated model of workplace ostracism. Journal of Management, 39(1), 203–231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scheier, M. F., Carver, C. S., & Bridges, M. W. (1994). Distinguishing optimism from neuroticism (and trait anxiety, self-mastery, and self-esteem): a reevaluation of the life orientation test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67(6), 1063–1078.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, B., & Bowen, D. E. (1995). Winning the service game. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singh, J. (2000). Performance productivity and quality of frontline employees in service organizations. Journal of Marketing, 64(2), 15–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spencer, S. J., Zanna, M. P., & Fong, G. T. (2005). Establishing a causal chain: why experiments are often more effective in examining psychological process than mediational analyses. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89(6), 845–851.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Surprenant, C. F., & Solomon, M. R. (1987). Predictability and personalization in the service encounter. Journal of Marketing, 51(April), 86–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsai, W. C., Chen, C. C., & Liu, H. L. (2007). Test of a model linking employee positive moods and task performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(6), 1570–1583.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Twenge, J. M., Baumeister, R. F., Tice, D. M., & Stucke, T. S. (2001). If you can't join them, beat them: effects of social exclusion on aggressive behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81(6), 1058–1069.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Auken, S., Barry, T. E., & Bagozzi, R. P. (2006). A cross-country construct validation of cognitive age. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 34(3), 439–455.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Raaij, W. F., & Pruyn, A. T. H. (1998). Customer control and evaluation of service validity and reliability. Psychology and Marketing, 15(8), 811–832.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2004). Evolving to a new dominant logic for marketing. Journal of Marketing, 68(1), 1–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Warburton, W. A., Williams, K. D., & Cairns, D. R. (2006). When ostracism leads to aggression: the moderating effects of control deprivation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 42(2), 213–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wheaton A. (2001). Ostracism and susceptibility to the overtures of socially deviant groups and individuals. Honors Thesis, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.

  • Williams, K. D. (2001). Ostracism: The power of silence. New York: The Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, K. D. (2007). Ostracism. Annual Review of Psychology, 58(January), 425–452.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, K. D., & Sommer, K. L. (1997). Social ostracism by coworkers: does rejection lead to loafing or compensation? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23(7), 693–706.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, K. D., Cheung, C. K., & Choi, W. (2000). Cyberostracism: effects of being ignored over the Internet. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79(5), 748–762.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu, L., Wei, L., & Hui, C. (2011). Dispositional antecedents and consequences of workplace ostracism: an empirical investigation. Frontiers of Business Research in China, 5, 23–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yagil, D., & Gal, I. (2002). The role of organizational service climate in generating control and empowerment among workers and customers. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 9, 215–226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yim, C. K., Chan, K. W., & Lam, S. S. (2012). Do customers and employees enjoy service participation? Synergistic effects of self- and other-efficacy. Journal of Marketing, 76(6), 121–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zadro, L., Williams, K. D., & Richardson, R. (2004). How low can you go? Ostracism by a computer is sufficient to lower self-reported levels of belonging, control, self-esteem, and meaningful existence. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40(4), 560–567.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zeithaml, V. A., Berry, L., & Parasuraman, A. (1996). The behavioral consequences of service quality. Journal of Marketing, 60(April), 31–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research is supported by a Hong Kong SAR General Research Grant (755511) awarded to the first author and a Hong Kong SAR General Research Grant (POLYU-B-Q36V) awarded to the second author. The authors thank Deep Batra for his professional computer programming in the laboratory experiments and Fangyu Zhang for the survey data collection.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Business and Economics, University of Hong Kong, Pok Fu Lam, Hong Kong

    Echo Wen Wan

  2. Department of Management and Marketing, Faculty of Business, Hong Kong Polytechnic University, M801 Li Ka Shing Tower, Hung Hom, Kowloon, Hong Kong

    Kimmy Wa Chan

  3. Department of Marketing, School of Business, Hong Kong Baptist University, Kowloon Tong, Hong Kong

    Rocky Peng Chen

Authors
  1. Echo Wen Wan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kimmy Wa Chan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Rocky Peng Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rocky Peng Chen.

Additional information

The authors share equal authorship. The order of authorship was determined by flipping coins.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

ESM 1

(PDF 177 kb)

ESM 2

(PDF 140 kb)

ESM 3

(PDF 120 kb)

Appendix

Appendix

Table 5 Measurement items and validity assessment (Study 3)
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wan, E.W., Chan, K.W. & Chen, R.P. Hurting or helping? The effect of service agents’ workplace ostracism on customer service perceptions. J. of the Acad. Mark. Sci. 44, 746–769 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-015-0466-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-015-0466-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation