Moving Toward Collaborative Service Recovery: A Multiactor Orientation

Abstract

Please scroll down for article-it is on subsequent pagesWith 12,500 members from nearly 90 countries, INFORMS is the largest international association of operations research (O.R.) and analytics professionals and students. INFORMS provides unique networking and learning opportunities for individual professionals, and organizations of all types and sizes, to better understand and use O.R. and analytics tools and methods to transform strategic visions and achieve better outcomes. For more information on INFORMS, its publications, membership, or meetings visit Abstract. Service recovery research has traditionally been firm-centric, focusing primarily on the time and effort expended by firms in addressing service failures. The subsequent shift to a customer-centric orientation addressed the customer's role in recovery situations, and the recent dyadic orientation has explored the effectiveness of their joint efforts. However, earlier conceptualizations failed to take adequate account of the complexity of service recovery encounters in which multiple actors collaborate and integrate resources. This study explores how multiactor collaborations influence the customer's experience of service recovery by adopting a multiactor orientation and by applying service-dominant logic. After reviewing the customer experience literature, a collaborative recovery experience framework is developed that emphasizes the joint efforts of multiple actors and customers to achieve a favorable recovery experience. In a contextualization, the usefulness of the new framework to explain customer experiences in collaborative service processes is shown. Finally, further research avenues are proposed.

Money for Nothing: The Impact of Compensation on Customers’ Bad-Mouthing in Service Recovery Encounters

“…Following calls for further research to examine how different employee behaviors contribute to the effectiveness of compensation (Gelbrich et al, 2016), the present study uses the concept of collaborative recovery. Grounded in the service recovery literature on collaboration in service recoveries (Arsenovic et al, 2019), we define this construct as the social process in which customers and companies interact and engage in organized activities to recover a failed situation for mutual benefit. In such situations, both the customer and the service provider take the responsibility for having the problem solved (Arsenovic et al, 2019).…”

“…Grounded in the service recovery literature on collaboration in service recoveries (Arsenovic et al, 2019), we define this construct as the social process in which customers and companies interact and engage in organized activities to recover a failed situation for mutual benefit. In such situations, both the customer and the service provider take the responsibility for having the problem solved (Arsenovic et al, 2019). This kind of collaboration recently received considerable attention (Park & Ha, 2022;Van Vaerenbergh et al, 2018) and has been referred to as co-creation (Roggeveen et al, 2012), customer participation (Dong et al, 2008), or customer involvement (Guo et al, 2016).…”

“…Second, building on the emerging literature on collaboration in service recovery situations (Arsenovic et al, 2019), this study measures the actual level of collaboration rather than manipulating collaboration as in earlier studies (Dong et al, 2008;Hazée et al, 2017;Roggeveen et al, 2012). Our alternative approach thus enabled us to determine the level of collaboration at which compensation as a recovery tactic effectively mitigates negative customer responses, thereby reducing bad-mouthing behavior.…”

“…Failure severity used a semantic-differential scale on the three items which were anchored 1 = Minor problem, 7 = Major problem; 1 = Small inconvenience, 7 = Major inconvenience; 1 = Minor aggravation, 7 = Major aggravation. byArsenovic et al, 2019) …”

An integrated service recovery process for service failures: insights from systematic review

“…The existing literature (Surachartkumtonkun et al , 2015) points out that the response of organizations to SR has been discretionary and uncertain, thereby causing dissatisfaction among customers, as they are unable to predict the response of the organization if an event failure arises. Some studies (Xu et al , 2016) highlighted that even though the term “SR experience” is often used in the literature, indicating the response of the organizations, yet there are few instances where such efforts were conceptualized by organizations (Arsenovic et al , 2019). Reflecting this, this study intends to address this gap by taking a three-pronged approach.…”