CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 2,723Customer Service Quality and LoyaltyService and Product InnovationCustomer churn and segmentation

Customer Evaluations of Service Complaint Experiences: Implications for Relationship Marketing

Tax, Stephen S., Brown, Stephen W., Chandrashekaran, Murali·1998·Journal of Marketing
DOI 10.2307/1252161
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Many companies consider investments in complaint handling as means of increasing customer commitment and building customer loyalty. Firms are not well informed, however, on how to deal successfully with service failures or the impact of complaint handling strategies. In this study, the authors find that a majority of complaining customers were dissatisfied with recent complaint handling experiences. Using justice theory, the authors also demonstrate that customers evaluate complaint incidents in terms of the outcomes they receive, the procedures used to arrive at the outcomes, and the nature of the interpersonal treatment during the process. In turn, the authors develop and test competing hypotheses regarding the interplay between satisfaction with complaint handling and prior experience in shaping customer trust and commitment. The results support a quasi “brand equity” perspective—whereas satisfaction with complaint handling has a direct impact on trust and commitment, prior positive experiences mitigate, to a limited extent, the effects of poor complaint handling. Implications for managers and scholars are discussed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/002224299806200205

Cites

10 of 10 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Most researchers use either transaction-specific satisfaction or cumulative satisfaction, and only a few studies address both constructs.

    “Only a few studies address both constructs (e.g., Homburg and Fu ¨rst 2005; Maxham III and Netemeyer 2002).”

    From A Meta-Analysis of Organizational Complaint Handling and Customer Responses (2011) · cites this paper as Tax, Brown, and Chandrashekaran 1998

  • Regular customers have accumulated goodwill through satisfying past experiences that mitigate the negative effects of poorly handled complaints.

    “The brand equity literature suggests that regular customers have accumulated goodwill through satisfying past experiences that mitigate the negative effects of poorly handled complaints (Tax, Brown, and Chandrashekaran 1998).”

    From Recovery Voice and Satisfaction After Service Failure: An Experimental Investigation of Mediating and Moderating Factors (2007) · cites this paper as Tax, Brown, and Chandrashekaran 1998

  • Poor complaint handling will damage the relationship most when prior experience is positive and expectations for recovery are high.

    “Consistent with these arguments, the service quality literature has also found that poor complaint handling will damage the relationship most when prior experience is positive and expectations for recovery are high (Tax, Brown, and Chandrashekaran 1998).”

    From Recovery Voice and Satisfaction After Service Failure: An Experimental Investigation of Mediating and Moderating Factors (2007) · cites this paper as Tax, Brown, and Chandrashekaran 1998

  • For customers with satisfactory past experiences or customers who are loyal, expectations for recovery tend to be high.

    “Thus, for customers with satisfactory past experiences or customers who are loyal, expectations for recovery tend to be high, which makes the process of complaint handling highly important (Kelley and Davis 1994;Tax, Brown, and Chandrashekaran 1998).”

    From Recovery Voice and Satisfaction After Service Failure: An Experimental Investigation of Mediating and Moderating Factors (2007) · cites this paper as Tax, Brown, and Chandrashekaran 1998

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Tax, S. S., Brown, S. W., & Chandrashekaran, M.
Affiliations
  • University of Victoria (CA)
  • College of Business, Arizona State University.
  • University of Cincinnati (US)
ORCID
Tax, Stephen S.
Venue
Journal of Marketing
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
1998-04
Volume
62
Issue
2
Pages
60-76
ISSN
  • 0022-2429 (ISSN-L)
  • 1547-7185
DOI
10.2307/1252161
OpenAlex
W2313319791
Cited by
2,723
References
10
Citations by year
2026: 145 · 2025: 77 · 2024: 76 · 2023: 95 · 2022: 97 · 2021: 104 · 2020: 94 · 2019: 115 · 2018: 115 · 2017: 118 · 2016: 134 · 2015: 137 · 2014: 176 · 2013: 134 · 2012: 158
FWCI
69.34
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
Locations
Journal of Marketing (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Customer Service Quality and Loyalty
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › Service and Product Innovation
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › Customer churn and segmentation
Keywords
service complaints, complaint handling, consumer evaluation, relationship marketing, customer loyalty, customer commitment, customer satisfaction

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review