HİZMET BAŞARISIZLIĞININ BÜYÜKLÜĞÜ HİZMET TELAFİSİ ETKİNLİĞİNİ ETKİLER Mİ?

Ümit DOĞRUL, (Mersin Üniversitesi, İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi, İşletme Bölümü, Üretim Yönetimi ve Pazarlama Ana Bilim Dalı, Mersin, Türkiye)
Mehmet YAĞCI (Mersin Üniversitesi, İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi, İşletme Bölümü, Üretim Yönetimi ve Pazarlama Ana Bilim Dalı, Mersin, Türkiye)
Beykoz Akademi Dergisi
2 2
Yıl: 2020 Cilt: 8 Sayı: 2 Sayfa Aralığı: 180 - 198 Metin Dili: Türkçe DOI: 10.14514/BYK.m.26515393.2020.8/2.180-198 İndeks Tarihi: 08-06-2021

HİZMET BAŞARISIZLIĞININ BÜYÜKLÜĞÜ HİZMET TELAFİSİ ETKİNLİĞİNİ ETKİLER Mİ?

Öz:
Hizmetbaşarısızlıklarının neden olabileceği olumsuzluklardan kaçınmak,başarılı hizmet telafileri sunmakla mümkündür. Başarısızlık sonrası yapılan telafilerin, müşteriler tarafından nasıl değerlendirildiğinin anlaşılması işletme yöneticileri için önemlidir. Müşterilerin,yaşanan bütün başarısızlıklar karşısında hizmet telafilerine verdikleri tepkilerin birbirinin aynı olması beklenmemelidir. Özellikle başarısızlığın büyüklük düzeyi hizmet telafilerinin değerlendirilme sürecinde önemli bir faktördür. Bu çalışmanın amacı,algılanan adalet boyutlarının telafi tatminine etkisi üzerinde başarısızlığın büyüklüğünün düzenleyici etkilerini ortaya koymaktır. Bu kapsamda araştırma amacı doğrultusunda deneysel bir tasarım oluşturulmuştur. Araştırmaya 723 kişikatılmış ve araştırma kapsamında belirlenen hipotezler hiyerarşik regresyon analizi ile test edilmiştir. Analiz sonuçlarına göre, prosedürel ve dağıtımsal adaletin telafi tatmine etkisinin başarısızlığın büyüklüğüne göre farklılaştığı ortaya konmuştur.
Anahtar Kelime:

DOES THE MAGNITUDE OF SERVICE FAILURE AFFECT THE EFFECTIVENESS OF SERVICE RECOVERY?

Öz:
Avoiding the negativiness caused by service failures is possible by offering successful service recoveries. It is important for business executives to understand how the compensations made after failure are evaluated by customers. The reactions of customers to service recoveriesinthe face of all failures should not be expected to be the same. Especially the magnitude of failure is an important factor in the evaluation of service recoveries.The aim of this study is to reveal the moderationeffects of the magnitude of failure on the effect of perceived justice dimensions on compensatory satisfaction. In this context, an experimental design has been created for the purpose of the research. 723 people participated in the study and the hypotheses determined within the scope of the research were tested by hierarchical regression analysis. According to the results of the analysis, it has been revealed that the effect of procedural and distributional justice on compensatory satisfaction differs according to the magnitude of the failure.
Anahtar Kelime:

Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık
  • Bambauer-Sachse, S. & Rabeson, L. (2015). Determining adequate tangible compensation in service recovery processes for developed and developing countries: The role of severity and responsibility. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 22, 117–127.
  • Barakat, L. L., Ramsey, J. R., Lorenz, M. P. & Gosling, M. (2015). Severe service failure recovery revisited: evidence of its determinats in an emerging market context. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 31, 1-5.
  • Betts, T. K., Wood, M. S. & Tadisina S. K. (2011). The impact of failure severity, prior failure and company control on service recovery outcomes. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 18(3), 365-376.
  • Bitner, M. J. (1990). Evaluating service encounters: The effect of physical surroundings and employee responses. Journal of Marketing, 54(2), 69-82.
  • Blodgett J. G., Hill D. J. & Tax S. S. (1997). The effects of distributive, procedural and ınteractional justice on postcomplaint behavior. Journal of Retailing, 73(2), 185– 210.
  • Chaplin, W. F. (1991). The Next Generation of Moderator Research in Personality Psychology. Journal of Personality, 59(2), 143–178.
  • Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G. ve Aiken, L. S. (2003). Applied Multiple Regression / Correlation Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (3. Baskı), Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum
  • Craighead, C. W., Karwan, K. R. & Miller, J. L (2004). The effects of severity of failure and customer loyalty on service recovery strategies. Production and Operations Management, 13(4), 307–321.
  • Davidow, M. (2003a). Organizational responses to customer complaints: What works and what doesn’t. Journal of Service Research, 5(3), 225-250.
  • Folger, R. & Greenberg, J. (1985). Procedural justice: an interpretative analysis of personal systems.. In: Rowland, K & Ferris G (eds). Research in personal and human resources management. Greenwich, CT: Jai Press, 141–183.
  • Gilly, M. & Gelb, B. (1982). Post-purchase consumer process and the complaining consumer. Journal of Consumer Research, 9, 323-328.
  • Gravetter, F. J. & Forzano, L. B. (2013). Research method for the behavioral science (5th. ed.). Cengage Learning, USA.
  • Hart, C. W. L., Heskett, J. L & Sasser, W. E. (1990). The profitable art of service recovery. Harward Business Review, 72, 148-156.
  • Higgins, E. T., (1997). Beyond pleasure and pain. Am. Psychol. 52(12), 1280–1300.
  • Hocutt, M. A., Bowers, M. R., & Donavan, D. T. (2006). The art of service recovery: fact or fiction? Journal of Services Marketing, 20(3), 199–207.
  • Hoffman, K. D. & Kelley, S. W. (2000). Perceived justice needs and recovery evaluation: a contingency approach. European Journal of Marketing, 34(3/4), 418-432.
  • Hoffman, K. D., Kelley, S. W., & Rotalsky, H. M. (1995). Tracking servicefailures and employee recovery efforts. Journal of Services Marketing, 9, 49–61.
  • Jianfen, Z., Mingli, Z. & Qingmin, K. (2010). The effect of service fairness on service quality, customer satisfaction and customer loyalty. Management and Service Science (MASS), 2010 International Conference on, 24-26 August 2010.
  • Kelley, S. W., Hoffman, K. D. & Mark A. D. (1993). A typology of retail failures and recoveries. Journal of Retailing, 69 (4), 429-452.
  • Kline, Rex. B. (2005) Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling. New York: The Guilford Press.
  • Lii, Y.S., Ding, M.C. & Chiang, H. (2012). Relative effects of perceived justice in airline service recovery: Is corporate reputation a double-edged word? Business and Information, Sapporo July 3-5, B596-B618.
  • Mattila, A. S. (1999). An examination of factors affecting service recovery in a restaurant setting. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 23, 284-299.
  • Mattila, A. S. (2001). The effectiveness of service recovery in a multi-industry setting. Journal of Services Marketing. 15 (7), 583-596.
  • Maxham III, J. G. (2001). Service recovery’s influence on consumer satisfaction, positive word-of-mouth, and purchase intentions. Journal of Business Research, 54, 11–24.
  • Maxham, J. III & Netemeyer, R. (2002). A Longitudinal study of complaining customers evaluations of multiple service failures and recovery efforts. Journal of Marketing, 66 (4), 57-71.
  • Miller, L. J., Craighead, C. W. & Karwan, K. R. (2000). Service recovery: a framework and empirical investigation. Journal of Operations Management, 18, 387-400.
  • Nikbin, D., İsmail, İ., Marimuthu, M. & Jalalkamali, M. (2010). Perceived justice in service recovery and recovery satisfaction: The moderating role of corporate image. International Journal of Marketing Studies, 2(2), 47-56.s
  • Ok, C., Back, K.J. & Shanklin, C.W. (2005). Modeling roles of service recovery strategy: a relationship –focused view. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 29, 484, 508.
  • Rio-Lanza, A. B., Vazquez-Casielles, R. & Diaz-Martin A. M. (2009). Satisfaction with service recovery: Perceived justice and emotional responses. Journal of Business Research, 62(8), 775-781.
  • Sabharwal, N., Soch, H. & Kaur, H. (2010). Are we satisfied with incompetent services? A scale development approach for service recovery. Journal of Services Research, 10(1), 126-143.
  • Seiders, K. & Berry L. L. (1998). Service fairness: what it is and why it matters. Acad Manage Exec, 12(2), 8– 20.
  • Smith, A. K., Bolton, R. N. & Wagner, J. (1999). A model of customer satisfaction with service encounters involving failure and recovery. Journal of Marketing Research, 36, 356-372.
  • Sparks, B. A. & McColl-Kennedy, J. R. (2001). Justice strategy options for increased customer satisfaction in a services. Journal of Business Research, 54, 209– 218.
  • Tax, S. S., Brown, S. W. & Chandrashekaran, M. (1998). Customer evaluations of service complaint experiences: Implications for relationship marketing. Journal of Marketing, 62 (2), 60-76.
  • Tsarenko, Y. & Tojib, D. (2012). The role of personality characteristics and service failure severity in consumer forgiveness and service outcomes. Journal of Marketing Management, 28(9–10), 1217–1239.
  • Weun, S., Beatty, S & Jones, M. (2004). The impact of service failure severity on service recovery evaluations andpost-recovery relationships. Journal of Services Marketing, 18(2), 133 – 146.
  • Whitley, B. E. & Kite, M. E. (2013). Principles of Research in Behavioral Science (3th ed.). Taylor &Francis, New York.
  • Zeithaml, V. A., Berry, L. L., & Parasuraman, A. (1993). The nature and determinants of customer expectations of service. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 21(1), 1-12.
  • Zemke, R. (1993). The art of service recovery: fixing broken customers and keeping them on your side. American Management Association, New York, 463–476.
APA Doğrul Ü, Yagci M (2020). HİZMET BAŞARISIZLIĞININ BÜYÜKLÜĞÜ HİZMET TELAFİSİ ETKİNLİĞİNİ ETKİLER Mİ?. , 180 - 198. 10.14514/BYK.m.26515393.2020.8/2.180-198
Chicago Doğrul Ümit,Yagci Mehmet HİZMET BAŞARISIZLIĞININ BÜYÜKLÜĞÜ HİZMET TELAFİSİ ETKİNLİĞİNİ ETKİLER Mİ?. (2020): 180 - 198. 10.14514/BYK.m.26515393.2020.8/2.180-198
MLA Doğrul Ümit,Yagci Mehmet HİZMET BAŞARISIZLIĞININ BÜYÜKLÜĞÜ HİZMET TELAFİSİ ETKİNLİĞİNİ ETKİLER Mİ?. , 2020, ss.180 - 198. 10.14514/BYK.m.26515393.2020.8/2.180-198
AMA Doğrul Ü,Yagci M HİZMET BAŞARISIZLIĞININ BÜYÜKLÜĞÜ HİZMET TELAFİSİ ETKİNLİĞİNİ ETKİLER Mİ?. . 2020; 180 - 198. 10.14514/BYK.m.26515393.2020.8/2.180-198
Vancouver Doğrul Ü,Yagci M HİZMET BAŞARISIZLIĞININ BÜYÜKLÜĞÜ HİZMET TELAFİSİ ETKİNLİĞİNİ ETKİLER Mİ?. . 2020; 180 - 198. 10.14514/BYK.m.26515393.2020.8/2.180-198
IEEE Doğrul Ü,Yagci M "HİZMET BAŞARISIZLIĞININ BÜYÜKLÜĞÜ HİZMET TELAFİSİ ETKİNLİĞİNİ ETKİLER Mİ?." , ss.180 - 198, 2020. 10.14514/BYK.m.26515393.2020.8/2.180-198
ISNAD Doğrul, Ümit - Yagci, Mehmet. "HİZMET BAŞARISIZLIĞININ BÜYÜKLÜĞÜ HİZMET TELAFİSİ ETKİNLİĞİNİ ETKİLER Mİ?". (2020), 180-198. https://doi.org/10.14514/BYK.m.26515393.2020.8/2.180-198
APA Doğrul Ü, Yagci M (2020). HİZMET BAŞARISIZLIĞININ BÜYÜKLÜĞÜ HİZMET TELAFİSİ ETKİNLİĞİNİ ETKİLER Mİ?. Beykoz Akademi Dergisi, 8(2), 180 - 198. 10.14514/BYK.m.26515393.2020.8/2.180-198
Chicago Doğrul Ümit,Yagci Mehmet HİZMET BAŞARISIZLIĞININ BÜYÜKLÜĞÜ HİZMET TELAFİSİ ETKİNLİĞİNİ ETKİLER Mİ?. Beykoz Akademi Dergisi 8, no.2 (2020): 180 - 198. 10.14514/BYK.m.26515393.2020.8/2.180-198
MLA Doğrul Ümit,Yagci Mehmet HİZMET BAŞARISIZLIĞININ BÜYÜKLÜĞÜ HİZMET TELAFİSİ ETKİNLİĞİNİ ETKİLER Mİ?. Beykoz Akademi Dergisi, vol.8, no.2, 2020, ss.180 - 198. 10.14514/BYK.m.26515393.2020.8/2.180-198
AMA Doğrul Ü,Yagci M HİZMET BAŞARISIZLIĞININ BÜYÜKLÜĞÜ HİZMET TELAFİSİ ETKİNLİĞİNİ ETKİLER Mİ?. Beykoz Akademi Dergisi. 2020; 8(2): 180 - 198. 10.14514/BYK.m.26515393.2020.8/2.180-198
Vancouver Doğrul Ü,Yagci M HİZMET BAŞARISIZLIĞININ BÜYÜKLÜĞÜ HİZMET TELAFİSİ ETKİNLİĞİNİ ETKİLER Mİ?. Beykoz Akademi Dergisi. 2020; 8(2): 180 - 198. 10.14514/BYK.m.26515393.2020.8/2.180-198
IEEE Doğrul Ü,Yagci M "HİZMET BAŞARISIZLIĞININ BÜYÜKLÜĞÜ HİZMET TELAFİSİ ETKİNLİĞİNİ ETKİLER Mİ?." Beykoz Akademi Dergisi, 8, ss.180 - 198, 2020. 10.14514/BYK.m.26515393.2020.8/2.180-198
ISNAD Doğrul, Ümit - Yagci, Mehmet. "HİZMET BAŞARISIZLIĞININ BÜYÜKLÜĞÜ HİZMET TELAFİSİ ETKİNLİĞİNİ ETKİLER Mİ?". Beykoz Akademi Dergisi 8/2 (2020), 180-198. https://doi.org/10.14514/BYK.m.26515393.2020.8/2.180-198
Sayfa Oluşturulma Tarihi
23-04-2024 18:10

İLETİŞİM

TÜBİTAK ULAKBİM TR Dizin

Yüzüncüyıl, İşçi Blokları Mahallesi

Muhsin Yazıcıoğlu Caddesi No:51/C

06530 Çankaya / ANKARA +90 (312) 298 92 00

trdizin@tubitak.gov.tr

TÜBİTAK ULAKBİM Ulusal Akademik Ağ ve Bilgi Merkezi Cahit Arf Bilgi Merkezi © Tüm Hakları Saklıdır. Gizlilik Politikası Kullanım Şartları