This study considers the impact that some organisational factors can have on a service firm’s ability to return dissatisfied customers to a state of satisfaction through service recovery. In other words, it investigates the potential impact organisational variables (modelled as antecedents) can have on the service recovery performance of frontline staff. It also assesses the impact that successful service recovery has on two outcome variables, namely, intentions to resign and job satisfaction. The results show that organisational commitment exerts a strong positive influence on the service recovery performance of frontline staff as does empowerment and rewarding them for service excellence. When frontline staff are performing service recovery effectively, they are less likely to resign and report higher levels of job satisfaction.

As the importance of service quality, as both marketing strategy and competitive advantage, gains more and more recognition, efforts to recover from poor service delivery are receiving increased attention. Yet, much of the literature is based on anecdotal accounts rather than theoretical conceptualizations or rigorous empirical assessment. At least one retailing study has shown that more than 70 per cent of customers who complain can be persuaded to continue shopping with the offending retailer provided that some effort is made to recover. Little, however, is known about which strategies to employ or how these strategies interact to influence customer perceptions and attitudes, especially in a services environment. Assesses, from a management perspective, the impact three service recovery options (decisions) can have on customer satisfaction: time/speed; level of atonement; and who should be involved in service recovery. Finds that level of atonement (a tangible offering) emerged as the most dominant main effect followed by time/speed, while the organizational position of the person involved in service recovery was not significant as a main effect.

Meanwhile, managers have been facing a complementary challenge: how to implement this cornerstone of marketing theory. Both groups appear to have had limited success in their respective endeavours. Part of the problem may lie in a failure to establish a generalisable model of market orientation and also the lack of a parsimonious measure of market orientation which managers can use to pinpoint organisational short-comings.Research has tended to focus on investigating the relationship between various measures of company performance and the adoption or implementation of particular aspects of a market or marketing orientation. Given the diverse range of research methodologies, measures and sample frames employed, it is unsurprising that there has been only limited validation.Part of the problem is definitional, with the terms marketing orientation (a business philosophy) and a market orientation (implementation of that philosophy) often confused (Kohli and Jaworski, 1990) and/or used interchangeably. Another difficulty is the unresolved issue of how to measure company performance, with continuing debate over the applicability and reliability of various organisational and social measures.There are likely to be operational difficulties in translating the marketing concept into action. Researchers in consumer behaviour warn of potential gaps between people's attitudes and their actual behaviour (Pieters, 1988). In a similar way, companies may have difficulty implementing the marketing concept because of a lack of ability (requisite knowledge, skills and systems) or opportunity (in less competitive environments a production orientation may be more profitable than a customer orientation).Even if one assumes that there is a link between market orientation and performance and that companies have the ability and opportunity to translate the marketing concept into action, a more fundamental problem arises. How should market orientation be measured?Studies by two groups of US researchers working in parallel on the relationship between market orientation and performance (

In this study, successor‐related factors that can influence the succession process in small and medium‐sized family businesses are empirically investigated. This study was undertaken in South Africa among 2,458 owner‐managers and successors in 1,038 family businesses. These respondents were identified via a snowball‐sampling technique. A total of 332 usable questionnaires were returned. The dependent variable in this study, namely, the perceived success of the succession process, is measured by two underlying dimensions: satisfaction with the process and continued profitability of the business. The empirical results indicate that the successor‐related factors that influence satisfaction with the process are, on the one hand, the willingness of the successor to take over and the relationship between the owner‐manager and successor, on the other hand. The continued profitability of the business is influenced by the willingness of the successor to take over the business, the preparation level of the successor, and the relationship between the successor and owner‐manager. The relationship between the owner‐manager and successor is in turn influenced by the extent to which interpersonal relationships in the family can be described as harmonious. Based on these findings recommendations for successful succession are offered.

IntroductionBusiness managers frequently refer to the competitive nature of the markets they serve. The increasing globalisation of business is often cited as a major contributing factor. Managers of service firms in countries which are signatories of the Uruguay Round of the GATT agreement, in particular, may soon feel the uncomfortable heat of increased competition as protective trade barriers are systematically removed. This development is likely to re-establish customer retention as a strategic marketing objective. The renewed focus on the advantages (lower costs, increasingly profitable sales, market share growth and long-term profitability) of a loyal customer base will turn service firm managers' customer complaint handling efforts into a focal point (Rust and Zahorik, 1993). This is occurring against the background of findings by Best and Andreassen (1977) that not only are service customers more likely to experience problems (one out of three compared to one out of five for goods) and voice complaints, but they are also less likely to be satisfied with customer complaint handling than customers of goods companies.Two factors complicate the management of service failures. First, the simultaneity of production and consumption implies that, when service failures do occur, the presence of customers leaves little scope for corrective action without the customer being aware of the mishap. Second, satisfactory redress is, at times, difficult. Simultaneous production and consumption often renders "undoing", and even re-doing, a service impossible.Although the high level of human involvement in many services and the simultaneity of production and consumption make the occasional service failure almost inevitable, Hart et al. (1990) point out that dissatisfied customers are not inevitable. Service firms can go a long way towards turning disgruntled customers into satisfied ones who are likely to maintain the business relationship with the firm through effective service recovery programmes. Effective service recovery does not occur by luck, however, nor is it solely driven by the interpersonal skills of frontline employees (Bell and Ridge, 1992, p. 58). It needs to be a planned and well-managed process. Service recovery planning ought to be based on research-based knowledge in order to avoid the harmful