Suchergebnisse

This paper presents an important new means of analyzing service recovery efforts from an operational systems maturity perspective. Specifically, seven dimensions that measure the structure of a service recovery system are used to derive a set of service recovery system profiles. The dimensions and profiles are constructed using data obtained from 158 practicing service managers on their organizations' approaches to correcting service failures. Cluster analysis is used to develop three distinct system profiles: recoverers, followers, and laggards. Additional analyses indicate that significant differences in the utilization of specific recovery practices, recovery outcomes, recovery performance, and organizational characteristics are associated with these groups.The results suggest that the systematic development of service recovery systems may follow a logical path as an organization matures in its approach to dealing with service failures. Additionally, it is apparent that mature firms exhibit a more advanced and integrated system, employ a wider range of techniques for recovery, and demonstrate superior performance. The results also point to a need to more fully understand the relative importance of service recovery structural dimensions to successful firms.

ABSTRACTThis study identifies the structural dimensions that constitute a service recovery system. We employ a structured scale development process to introduce, define, and operationalize seven distinct first‐order constructs (i.e., structural dimensions) of service recovery. Potential constructs and their items are identified from the literature, experts and practitioners are employed to refine scales, and psychometric properties are tested using data from a sample of 158 service providers. Constructs such as those developed here should prove to be useful as researchers strive to incorporate operational notions into service recovery studies and to move toward systematic recovery prescriptions for service providers. Accordingly, the results presented herein can provide a springboard for future research on service recovery while also providing practicing managers with a diagnostic tool against which to benchmark existing recovery systems.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to examine to what extent the factors of the operating environment influence the structural dimensions and subsequent performance of a firm's recovery system.Design/methodology/approachUsing contingency theory and a sample of 158 service firms, this research tests for structural differences in service recovery systems based on Schmenner's widely‐cited taxonomy, the service process matrix. To conduct the analysis, both multiple analysis of variance (MANOVA) and analysis of variance (ANOVA) models were tested to assess overall system differences and to detect individual dimensional differences.FindingsThe results indicate that differences in the structure of service recovery systems do exist across divergent operating environments. Additionally, differences in performance measures were found only in capability improvements, while customer‐oriented performance did not vary across operating environments.Originality/valueThe paper is believed to be the first to empirically investigate how differences in operating environments increase the likelihood that firms will employ divergent recovery system configurations. This work yields valuable insights into how organizations can design their systems to more appropriately respond to the demands of the environments in which they operate. The results also lend credence to the concept of equifinality, which suggests similar ends are attainable through multiple means.