The purpose of this study is to determine which level of tangible compensation for a service failure leads to high levels of customer satisfaction for moderate- versus high-involvement services as well as for different conditions of responsibility for the failure and failure severity.
The results reveal that, for moderate-involvement services, all types of compensation are equally appropriate, except for when customers are responsible for a severe failure. In this condition, they expect tangible compensation of higher benefit. For high-involvement services, the more severe the failure, the higher the benefit of tangible compensation should be, independent of responsibility.
The findings suggest that managers should consider the level of service involvement as well as responsibility for and severity of the failure when choosing the level of tangible compensation. The results of this study provide new insights into how to choose appropriate and efficient service recovery measures. Bambauer-Sachse, S. Emerald Group Publishing Limited. Please share your general feedback.
Contact Customer Support. To read this content please select one of the options below:. Access and purchase options You may be able to access this content by logging in via your Emerald profile.
Rent this content from DeepDyve. Rent from DeepDyve. If you think you should have access to this content, click to contact our support team. Contact us. Please note you do not have access to teaching notes. Access and purchase options You may be able to access teaching notes by logging in via your Emerald profile. Abstract Purpose The purpose of this study is to determine which level of tangible compensation for a service failure leads to high levels of customer satisfaction for moderate- versus high-involvement services as well as for different conditions of responsibility for the failure and failure severity.
