The Positive Effects of Customers’ Power on Their Behavioral Responses After Service Failure

Abstract

Challenging the conventional perception that “power corrupts,” the authors assert that activation of customer power before a service encounter can lead to less negative behavioral manifestations toward a service provider after a service failure. Three experimental studies help substantiate this contention. Study 1 shows a sequential mediation process of how increased power leads to a more positive secondary appraisal and lessens the perceived severity of a failure. This process ultimately leads to (1) lower intentions for revenge and (2) lower demanded compensation. Study 2 solidifies these findings using stimuli for power inducement easily replicable by service managers. Study 3 establishes the boundary conditions and finds that the positive effects of power in postservice failure only holds for a single service failure context but not a double deviation context. This research offers an integrated explanation of how power leads to more positive behavioral actions through a sequential mediation effect involving cognitive appraisals. In doing so, this research sheds light on the nuances of power in affecting customer behavior. The practical method of activating perceived power may motivate service managers to apply it to buffer the potential negative effects of service failure. However, caution is advised, as such effects may diminish in the context of a series of failed resolution attempts.

The Service Recovery Journey: Conceptualization, Integration, and Directions for Future Research

“…These circumstances and actions are not classified as part of the SRJ as they represent preemptive actions that target the organization’s entire (or partial) customer base before a failure occurs. They include brand equity (Brady et al 2008), corporate social responsibility (Bolton and Mattila 2015), the presence of religious symbols in the servicescape (Newton, Wong, and Cassidy 2018), the activation of customer power (Sembada, Tsarenko, and Tojib 2016), rapport between customers and employees (Worsfold, Worsfold, and Bradley 2007), or the presence of warnings about potential service failures before the service is delivered (i.e., inoculation; Mikolon, Quaiser, and Wieseke 2015), among others.…”

When do low‐power customers complain? The joint effects of chronic sense of personal power and complaint success on complaining intentions

“…A sense of power regulates consumer behavior in many different ways. In some cases, it can either greatly help consumers (Sembada et al, 2016) or hurt them (Jin et al, 2014). Although the importance of a personal sense of power has received attention in the consumer behavior literature, only a few studies have explored the effects of one's sense of power on voicing complaints (Min & Kim, 2019).…”

“…Rucker & Galinsky, 2016; Rucker, Galinsky, & Dubois, 2012), but the research which provided practical methods of empowering customers is scarce (e.g. Sembada et al, 2016). Our study demonstrates that businesses may overcome the problem of customers unwilling to complain by successfully communicating a policy welcoming complaints because it increases the perceived success of complaining and compensates for consumers' low chronic sense of power.…”

“…During their dining experience, they encountered several problems, including slow arrival of their orders and waiters who were generally unfriendly. The service scenario was adapted from Sembada, Tsarenko, and Tojib (2016). After reading the scenario, all participants were asked to complete a list of structured questions dealing with their intentions to complain had they personally experienced the incident.…”

Does it really hurt? Making sense of varieties of anger

“…For example, explanations (Grewal, Roggeveen, & Tsiros, 2008) and apologies (Roschk & Kaiser, 2013) can sometimes appease anger. Furthermore, perceptions of power can lead to reduction in feelings of anger following a service failure (Sembada, Tsarenko, & Tojib, 2016). However, research has conflated the two facets of anger and made it difficult to know which of the two emotional forms is actually influenced by a given response strategy.…”