Understanding Customer Barriers and Barrier-Attenuating Practices in Access-Based Services

[We’re pleased to welcome authors Simon Hazée, Cécile Delcourt, and Yves Van Vaerenbergh who recently published an article in the Journal of Service Research entitled “Burdens of Access: Understanding Customer Barriers and Barrier-Attenuating Practices in Access-Based Services.” Below, the authors share more insight on their research in the service industry:]

What motivated you to pursue this research? JSR_16.2_72ppiRGB_powerpoint.jpgWe are witnessing a global rise of what’s been called ‘the access economy’. This growth is yet mainly driven by an increasing supply, with lots of companies—including manufacturers like BMW or Daimler AG—offering services that grant customers limited access to goods. Although these services offer several potential advantages, convincing customers to use them remains challenging. Service innovation failures represent potential losses of revenues that can even endanger firms’ competitiveness; indicating the pressing need to understand the barriers that keep customers from participating in the access economy.

Were there any surprising findings? Customers face several important barriers for why they don’t participate in the access economy, and these barriers do not always have rational grounds. For instance, one striking observation is that customers are afraid of contamination. After all, when accessing goods, you know for sure that someone else—whom you do not know—has touched the product; this may create disgust and avoidance responses. Another surprising finding is that customers believe they must engage in a bunch of practices to attenuate the barriers themselves. For example, customers must be ready to alter or postpone their needs to counter the fact that goods might not be available when needed, an important barrier perceived by customers.
Interestingly, although engaging in such practices helps attenuating barriers, customers also consider them as burdensome.

In what ways is your research innovative, and how do you think it will impact the field?Our findings suggest that customers reject service innovations not only in response to numerous perceived barriers associated with the innovation but also out of consideration of the practices in which they must engage to attenuate those barriers. Prior research shows customers typically adopt and use access-based services to avoid the burdens of ownership. We show that they reject these services due to the burdens of access, which include the barriers to access and the barrier-attenuating practices. Understanding both the barriers and the practices in which customers engage is critical for theory and practice; it can reveal new ways to see, examine, and manage service innovations. In sum, the success of access initiatives is not necessarily for those service providers that show the benefits of using the service, but might be for those who are best at overcoming the barriers as well as facilitating and limiting the practices in which customers engage.

Visit the JSR homepage to sign up for email alerts today!

Customer misbehaviour in the collaborative economy: Is it contagious or not?

Co-authors Tobias Schaefers, Kristina Wittkowski, Sabine Benoit, and Rosellina Ferraro recently published an article in the Journal of Service Research entitled “Contagious Effects of Customer Misbehavior in Access-Based Services.” Below is their informational video as a supplement to their article, which helps analyze how connections to a person’s community can influence behavior in the given shared space.

 

Don’t forget to visit the journal’s homepage to sign up for email alerts so you never miss the latest research!

Introducing the New Incoming Editor for the Journal of Service Research

We are excited to announce the new incoming editor for the Journal of Service Research, Dr. Michael Brady. Dr. Brady graciously provided some information regarding his education, career, and experience in the management field:

Mike_BradyDr. Michael (“Mike”) Brady is the Carl DeSantis Professor and chair, Department of Marketing, at Florida State University. Mike’s primary research interest lies at the intersection of customers and employees in frontline service transactions.  He has published articles in many top scholarly journals, including Journal of Service Research, Journal of Marketing, Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, and many other outlets.  His research articles have been cited over 15,000 times to date, his 2000 article in the Journal of Retailing is one of the most downloaded articles of all time in Science Direct, and his 2001 article in the Journal of Marketing was ranked the fifth most influential article for future research in services marketing.

Mike’s work has also been covered in the popular press, such as MSNBC, U.S. News, the Chicago Tribune, and Tampa Bay Times.  He has won numerous awards, including the Christopher Lovelock Career Contributions to the Service Discipline Award, the SERVSIG best article award, the Academy of Marketing Science and University outstanding teacher awards, the inaugural College of Business Distinguished Teacher award,  the University graduate studentJSR_16.2_72ppiRGB_powerpoint.jpg mentoring award, and the William R. Jones award for mentoring minority doctoral students.  Mike is a past president of the American Marketing Association’s Academic Council and an Associate Editor for the Journal of Service Research and Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science.  He is currently co-editing a special issue of Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science and he just finished co-editing a special issue of Journal of Service Research.

Mike currently lives with his wife of twenty
years and two children in Florida. Before earning his PhD, Mike played baseball at Florida State and was then drafted by the Los Angeles Dodgers, playing professionally for four years. Baseball runs in the Brady family, as Mike’s father also played professionally for the Detroit Tigers before assuming the university provost and president roles at Jacksonville University. Mike’s academic year consists of teaching large online sections of principles of marketing and will take on the role of Editor-in-Chief of the Journal of Service Research later this year.

Please be sure to sign up for email alerts through the homepage so you never miss the latest research from the Journal of Service Research.

A Theory of Lodging: Exploring Hotel Guest Behavior

Traveling is generally looked forward to by most, and when planning where to stay, we rely on reviews from past hotel guests. Does the hotel have consistently clean rooms? A lobby bar to meet up with my coworkers? A pool, spa, or gym? Regardless of our questions, they are approached through a mentality of short-term requirements; that is, we don’t have to reference our list of “deal breakers” like when purchasing a home.

Editor Chris Roberts of DePaul University recently published a study in the Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research presenting the habits and perspectives of traveler decisions entitled “A Theory of Lodging: Exploring Hotel Guest Behavior,” co-authored by Dr. Linda Shea. Below, Roberts explains the inspiration for this study:

What inspired you to be int4643862699_f8d70fef26_zerested in this topic? The field of hospitality is often classified as an applied field as it appears to lack theory of its own.  Instead, theories from other related fields are used in hospitality research.  However, the authors are asking the hospitality research academy to engage in a discussion about lodging.  Is there a theory that explains human behavior when staying in a hotel?  It appears that many humans behave differently when they are at home versus when staying overnight in a hotel.  The purpose of this paper is to stimulate thought among hospitality researchers to explore this idea.

Were there findings that were surprising to you? We are not declaring there is a distinctive theory of lodging; however, the difference in behavior is observable, suggesting there may be something to explore.

How do you see this study influencing future research and/or practice? Interested researchers are encouraged to attend the ICHRIE Conference to be held July 23-25, 2017 in Baltimore, MD, USA.  An opportunity to explore this will be available.  Please join us as we wrestle with this idea of a theory of lodging.

Sign up for email alerts so you never miss the latest articles from the Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research. 

Hotel lobby photo attributed to fhotels (CC).

When, and How, Should Firms Educate Their Customers?

[We’re pleased to welcome author Simon Bell of the University of Melbourne, Australia. Bell recently published an article in the Journal of Service Research entitled “Unraveling the Customer Education Paradox: When, and How, Should Firms Educate Their Customers?,” co-authored by Seigyoung Auh and Andreas B. Eisingerich. From Bell:]

  • What inspired you to be interested in this topic?

We have long been fascinated by service firms’ reluctance to let customers “into the kitchen”. Service firms have traditionally kept customers in the dark. The thinking is that giving cuJSR_16.2_72ppiRGB_powerpoint.jpgstomers too much insight or access to how a firm operates places that firm’s ‘black box’ or proprietary methodologies at risk. Educating customers apparently provides them with the skills to shop around and potentially switch to a competitor. Yet we noticed in our consulting work that some service firms (and even some service employees) were challenging this thinking. They were proactively educating their customers and seeme
d to be the better for it. We were keen to discover what was going on.

  • Were there findings that were surprising to you?

The results of our field study showed that firms were partly right. Increasing customer expertise through proactive efforts to educate their customers actually had an overall negative impact on loyalty. This was because customers build what we call “market-related” expertise – a general knowledge about how markets work – which provides customers with the confidence to shop around. But we also found that educating customers builds “firm-specific” expertise which ties a customer more closely to the firm. It’s just that this positive effect on loyalty did not outweigh the negative. Yet, when we conducted an experimental study we found that the customer loyalty effects of customer education were positive overall. We believe this has a lot to do with the context (i.e., firm and industry) in which customer education programs might be used. Our goal in this paper was to discover whether education did indeed have both positive and negative effects on loyalty, but clearly our next focus should be revealing the different contexts in which the positive effects outweigh the negative (and vice versa).

  • How do you see this study influencing future research and/or practice?

We think our results have some very important implications for managers. We think that, in this “Google age”, customers are already taking responsibility for their own understanding of how services, firms, and markets work. Easily digestible information and knowledge is at everyone’s fingertips so we think it’s risky for firms to keep customers in the dark. Our findings suggest that firms should be proactive in educating customers and pay particular attention to educating them about how their firm operates. Firms need to let customers into the kitchen and provide a greater level of transparency. We showed that it’s impossible to disentangle the market-related education from the firm-specific, but it is perfectly reasonable for firms to craft educational programs around more firm-specific elements. Ultimately, customers that are more competent at consuming your services are better for your business.

Sign up for email alerts on the  Journal of Service Research homepage.

How to Recover Customer Trust After Unsatisfactory Service

6279924331_f857af05f4_z[We’re pleased to welcome Kenny Basso of IMED Business School. Kenny recently published an article in Journal of Service Research, entitled “Trust Recovery Following a Double Deviation,” with co-author Cristiane Pizzutti. ]

The number of complaints on sites such as ripoffreport.com and consumersaffairs.com and complaint boards around the world illustrate that service failures are frequent and even inherent to service encounters. To avoid this public exposition, company can perform a service recovery. However, some times, the results of the service recovery are also negative to the client, or else, company is unable to appropriately restore service after a failure. In this situation, there is a double deviation of the client initial expectations about the service. The double deviation situation imposes a severe violation of the trust that the client has on the company. This paper focus on elucidates how a company can recover JSR coverclient trust after a double deviation.

Our results demonstrate that, contrary to what some may think, money (i.e., financial compensation) does not buy trust after double deviation; instead, companies can restore the client’s trust (at least in part) and maintain the relationship with him/her by making an apology or a promise of non-recurrence of the failure. However, it is worth noting that whereas making an apology does not require many resources, making a promise requires that the internal problems that generated the initial failure be resolved; otherwise, the promise will be a deception. Furthermore, it is important for firms to match the type of double deviation to the recovery strategy. Hence, promises have more efficacy in restoring trust when the trust violation is based on a company’s competence, as, for example, slow service in an understaffed store or by unprepared employees in on-the-job training programs, a room that is not clean, a meal that is cold, or baggage that arrives damaged. On the other hand, apology has more efficacy when the client perceives the failure as resulting from a lack of integrity or improper company principles and values, such as treating the customer badly because he bought a ticket from a daily deal web site, having rules that benefit the company written in fine print to make it more difficult for consumers to read them or giving a table reserved by one client to another who arrives earlier at the restaurant to ensure its occupancy.

The abstract for the paper:

Although double deviation (i.e., unsatisfactory service recovery) is an acknowledged phenomenon in the field of marketing, little attention has been devoted to determining what actions firms can take to restore consumer trust in the wake of such an event. Across four experimental studies of different populations and service sectors, we show that double deviation intensifies the trust violation generated by the initial service failure and that recovery from double deviations requires fundamentally different strategies than recovery from single deviations. Our results suggest that financial compensation is not an especially effective strategy for double deviations compared to the effectiveness of apologies and promises that the problem will not occur in the future. However, it is important for firms to match the type of double deviation to the recovery strategy, with apologies being more effective for integrity violations and promises being more effective for competence violations.

You can read “Trust Recovery Following a Double Deviation” from Journal of Service Research free for the next two weeks by clicking here. Want to know all about the latest research from Journal of Service ResearchClick here to sign up for e-alerts!

*Customer service image attributed to Didriks (CC)

Kenny Basso Professor of Marketing at the IMED Business School, Faculdade Meridional – IMED, Brazil. His research interests include services marketing, trust and consumer behavior. He has papers published in the Journal of Services Marketing, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, International Journal of Bank Marketing and Journal of Product & Brand Management.

Cristiane Pizzutti Professor of Marketing at the Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul – UFRGS, Brazil. Her research interests include consumer behavior and services marketing. She has papers published in the Journal of Product & Brand Management, Journal of Services Marketing, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, and International Journal of Electronic Commerce.

Diversify and Conquer: An Argument for Reinvigorating Marketing Science with Behavioral Science and Humanities

[We’re pleased to welcome Gerald Zaltman of Harvard Business School and Olson Zaltman Associates. Dr. Zaltman recently published an article in Cornell Hospitality Quarterly with co-authors Jerry Olson and James Forr of Olson Zaltman Associates, entitled “Toward a New Marketing Science for Hospitality Managers.”]

In “Toward a New Marketing Science for Hospitality Managers,” published in the Cornell Hospitality Quarterly, Jerry Olson, James Forr, and I point out that much of CQ_57_1_Cover.inddmarketing research and a great deal of marketing thought and action is influenced by the ideas and methods of an old marketing science.  We argue that a New Marketing Science is needed in which scientifically sound ideas and methods from the behavioral sciences and humanities are integrated around a coherent scientific perspective.  We feel this is especially important since life in the marketplace is experienced holistically and not in the silo like ways that companies, universities, and specific professions are organized.

Although current marketing does explore new ideas and methods, including neuro/biometric methods and big data approaches, these ideas are often treated piecemeal — used in isolation or as independent add-ons to more traditional work.  In contrast, we advocate integrating the best ideas and approaches from diverse fields to develop a new marketing science.  In “Toward a New Marketing Science” we focus on how key ideas from the mind sciences can produce a deeper and richer understanding of the minds of customers and also the minds of managers.  Other fields containing equally exciting marketing related advances include, linguistics, anthropology, sociology, philosophy, ethnomusicology, and art therapy, to name a few.

We provide four examples of applying a New Marketing Science approach to create emotionally resonant hospitality experiences.  However, the principles of a NMS can be applied to any marketing problem in any industry.  Practicing the NMS requires bold, imaginative thinking that goes beyond simple borrowing of ideas and imitation of best practices.

The abstract:

A New Marketing Science (NMS) is proposed that can dramatically improve a firm’s marketplace performance. The NMS challenges managers to dare to think and act differently. It generates deep insights into the thoughts and actions of both customers and managers and how the two mind-sets interact. As several examples illustrate, it departs from the “old” marketing science by its emphasis on imagination, knowing how and why a practice works, understanding the total customer experience, and focus on effectiveness over efficiency. The NMS is grounded in principles from the behavioral sciences and humanities such as the importance of the unconscious mind, the way mental frames serve as interpretative lenses, the centrality of emotions, the reconstructive nature of memory, and the importance of metaphor for learning about and influencing choices.

You can read “Toward a New Marketing Science for Hospitality Managers” from Cornell Hospitality Quarterly free for the next two weeks by clicking here. Want to know all about the latest research from Cornell Hospitality Quarterly? Click here to sign up for e-alerts!


 
Gerald ZaltmanGerald Zaltman is Founding partner in Olson Zaltman Associates and the Joseph C. Wilson Professor of Business Administration Emeritus at Harvard Business School, where he also was co-director of The Mind of the Market Laboratory. He has authored over 20 books including: How Customers Think: Essential Insights into the Mind of the Market and Marketing Metaphoria: What Deep Metaphors Reveal about the Minds of Consumers.

Jerry OlsonJerry Olson is Founding Partner in Olson Zaltman Associates and Professor Emeritus at Penn State University’s Smeal College of Business where he was Earl P. Strong Professor of Marketing and Department Chair. He has published more than 60 papers on these topics in conference proceedings and academic journals , including Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Marketing Research, and Journal of Marketing.

James ForrJames Forr is a director at Olson Zaltman Associates. He has led projects for Fortune 100 clients including IBM, Bank of America, PepsiCo, and P&G along with non-profit and public sector clients such as the AFL-CIO and the Funeral Service Foundation.  He also has led two projects that have helped clients win prestigious Ogilvy Awards from the Advertising Research Foundation.