Frontline employees’ cognitive appraisals and well-being in the face of customer aggression in an Eastern, collectivist culture

Abstract

Purpose – This research aims to examine the cognitive appraisals of frontline employees (FLEs) when dealing with aggressive customers and the impact on their well-being, as well as several moderator effects, in a collectivist, Eastern culture. Design/methodology/approach – A critical incident technique reveals the cognitive appraisal of FLEs who had recently experienced customer aggression. Data were collected through qualitative, in-depth interviews with 35 FLEs in customer-facing roles in Thailand. Findings – The FLEs perceived threats to self-esteem, physical well-being, goal completion at work, fairness or equity and sense of control when dealing with customer aggression. These cognitive appraisals affected their psychological well-being in the form of negative affectivity, anxiety, depression and stress. Importantly, factors that moderate (exacerbate or weaken) the impact of customer aggression on cognitive appraisal, and cognitive appraisal on psychological well-being were revealed, including “customer is always right” philosophy, social status, public versus private context and social support. Practical implications – Organisations should pay more attention to FLEs’ psychological well-being and how they interpret and deal with customers’ misbehaviour and aggression. The research identifies factors that moderate the impact of customer aggression on psychological well-being. Originality/value – This is the first empirical paper that has examined how FLEs cope with customer aggression in a collectivist, south-east Asian context where social norms calibrate FLEs’ responses to customer aggression. It is also the first research that adopts a contingency approach to understanding how FLEs cope with customer aggression – i.e. when faced with customer aggression, under what contingency conditions do FLEs cognitive appraisals have a stronger or weaker impact on their psychological well-being?

Service Employee Responses to Angry Customer Complaints

“…Anger can be a powerful but harmful emotion (Averill 1983). In a service context, customer anger and aggression can lead to negative consequences for service employees, including negatively affecting their service orientation (Harris 2013); job satisfaction (Harris and Daunt 2013); emotions (Dallimore, Sparks, and Butcher 2007; Wang et al 2011); well-being (Akkawanitcha et al 2015); stress and frustration (Harris and Reynolds 2003); emotional exhaustion and absenteeism (Grandey, Dickter, and Sin 2004); and retaliation, revenge, and sabotage intentions (Harris 2013; Wang et al 2011). Customers displaying anger can be seen as violating social and moral norms (Harris and Reynolds 2003) and give rise to perceptions of unfair employee mistreatment (Groth and Grandey 2012).…”

How psychology might alleviate violence in queues: Perceived future wait and perceived load moderate violence against service providers

“…violence, have caused physical injuries [14,16,24], and even murder [25]. Despite its increasing prevalence and serious implications, queue-related violence is under-studied and poorly understood [26,27,28,29].…”

When and Why a Squeakier Wheel Gets More Grease: The Influence of Cultural Values and Anger Intensity on Customer Compensation

“…In contrast, high-PD employees might overlook or undercompensate customers who express higher intensity anger. Appropriately addressing customer anger can prevent the escalation of customer frustration or rage (Patterson, Brady, and McColl-Kennedy 2016) and help to maintain the well-being of service employees (Akkawanitcha et al 2015). Organizations taking time to understand the various cognitive mechanisms that drive employees’ behavioral responses to displayed anger may improve employees’ emotional competence, enabling them to more effectively understand and navigate customers’ emotions (Delcourt et al 2016).…”

“…Similar to employee-recruiting negotiations, one party (the customer) represents itself, whereas the other (the service employee) represents the organization. Customer service scenarios may also be asymmetrical in relative emotional investment: The act of complaining signals the customer’s high involvement and concern for justice, whereas the service employee may perceive the angry individual as just one customer out of many (Akkawanitcha et al 2015; Liao 2007; Liao and Chuang 2004; Orsingher, Vaentini, and de Angelis 2010; Roschk and Gelbrich 2014). In addition, whereas the outcome of the interaction has immediate and direct implications for the customer (e.g., compensation), for the service employee, as well as the organization as a whole, compensation in a specific situation contributes to indirect, long-term considerations such as employee burnout and customer loyalty (Wirtz and Jerger 2017).…”

“…Understanding the cognitive mechanisms that underlie the tendency to financially compensate angry customers has important theoretical and practical implications for customer service settings. Customer anger leads to a variety of negative consequences for service employees, including negatively influencing their job satisfaction and well-being (Akkawanitcha et al 2015; Harris and Daunt 2013), as well as contributing to emotional exhaustion and absenteeism (Grandey, Dickter, and Sin 2004). It also hampers problem-solving by employees (Rafaeli et al 2012).…”