Content uploaded by Muhammad Hafiz Abd Rashid
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Muhammad Hafiz Abd Rashid on May 30, 2015
Content may be subject to copyright.
535
1 INTRODUCTION
Every company in the world strive their best to win
customers’ heart. However, it is nearly impossible to
deliver a perfect service with zero-defect. Even a gi-
ant corporations such as Starbucks, Toyota, Sony
and General Electric experienced service failure in
delivering their services (Lusch & Vargo, 2006).
Service failure may contributes to customer defec-
tion, negative word of mouth or the customers will
straight away complain to the service provider (Kim,
Kim, & Kim, 2009). Considering the negative influ-
ence of service failure, service providers shall strate-
gize effective ways to overcome the problems. Ser-
vice recovery is the only way to rectify the situation.
The level of compensation given should be equal to
customer’s loss. According to Riscinto-Kozub
(2008), service recovery is vital and it is one of the
key components in developing long term relation-
ship, fortifying customer loyalty and promote posi-
tive behavioral intentions.
Justice theory has been gaining popularity in stud-
ies related to service recovery (Nikbin, Ismail,
Marimuthu, & Jalalkamali, 2010). Justice theory was
developed based on social exchange theory and equi-
ty theory (Ok, 2004). Based on Mattila (2001), the
three dimensions of justice theory includes distribu-
tive justice (compensation), procedural justice (poli-
cies and procedures) and interactional justice (inter-
personal communication). Extant literatures claimed
that the application of justice theory in service re-
covery have been investigated in industries such as
tourism (Bernardo, Llach, Marimon, & Alonso-
Almeida, 2013); restaurant (Ok, 2004); airlines
(Nikbin, Armesh, Heydari, & Jalalkamali, 2011) and
a few other industries. However, its application is
still limited in Asian’s service recovery context.
Of late, there is an emerging trend of religious
awareness in current market (Swimberghe, Sharma,
& Flurry, 2009). While most service recovery studies
stresses on customer’s emotions and other related
outcomes, fewer attention has been given to the role
of customer’s characteristics (Tsarenko & Tojib,
2012). Therefore, religiosity is believe to play a sig-
nificant role in studies related to service failure. This
is due to the notion that highly religious people tend
to be more forgiving compared to less religious peo-
ple in the event of transgression (Tsarenko & Tojib,
2012).
Service recovery and satisfaction: The moderating role of religiosity
Muhammad Hafiz Abd Rashid
Universiti Teknologi MARA, Puncak Alam, Selangor, Malaysia
Fauziah Sh. Ahmad
Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
hafiz.rashid@puncakalam.uitm.edu.my
ABSTRACT: The aim of this paper is to discuss the role of religiosity on the relationship between service re-
covery and recovery satisfaction. This conceptual paper is based on reflecting the relevant scholarly discus-
sions in various conferences and available published literatures. This paper identifies that religiosity plays a
significant role on the relationship between service recovery and recovery satisfaction. This is due to the no-
tion that highly religious individual tend to be more forgiving in the event of service failure. However, this ar-
gument which is theoretical in nature needs to be statistically validated and hence proposed by this research.
Additionally, extant studies demonstrated that service recovery is critical in enhancing customer satisfaction.
Therefore, the three dimensions of justice theory namely distributive justice, procedural justice and interac-
tional justice should be considered if companies plan to embark on service recovery efforts. The discussion
offered in the paper is expected to be valuable for service provider seeking ways to win back upset customers
in the event of service failure. The discussion established that fair compensation, reasonable policies / proce-
dures, and effective communication process during service recovery are the key components in promoting sat-
isfaction.
Key words: Service failure; service recovery; recovery satisfaction; justice theory; religiosity.
Theory and Practice in Hospitality and Tourism Research – Radzi et al. (Eds)
© 2015 Taylor & Francis Group, London, ISBN 978-1-138-02706-0
2 LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Service failure
Service failure is inescapable and it can jeopardize
company’s reputation. According to Patterson, Cow-
ley, and Prasongsukarn (2006), service failure is de-
fined as a problem that happen in exchange where a
customer perceives a loss due to a failure on the part
of service provider. However, Komunda and
Osarenkhoe (2012) argued that service failure is the
failure of the company’s core service. It may include
failure to withdraw money from the Automated
Teller Machine, or the failure of product/service
provided by the company.
Service failure may happen due to a number of
reasons such as new staff, newly-introduced tech-
nology, or new customers (Stefan Michel, 2001). In
the event of service failure, the action taken by the
company is crucial to either fortify the existing rela-
tionship or turn the situation into a major problem
(Dong, Evans, & Zou, 2008). Thus, it is vital for the
company to ensure that they take immediate action
in resolving customer’s problem.
Service failure can result in negative word of
mouth, problematic relationship between the cus-
tomer and company, and negative future behaviors
(Ha & Jang, 2009). Unresolved customer’s problem
will only bring negative impact to the company’s
reputation. Customers will become more dissatisfied
and they will share the unhappy experiences with
others (Ha & Jang, 2009). Therefore, a good service
recovery efforts are critical to avoid such problems.
2.2 Service recovery
Service recovery refers to the actions taken by the
organization in responding to a service failure
(Gronroos, 1988). Service failure and recovery is the
‘moment of truth’ in testing the strength of relation-
ship between the company and customers (Smith &
Bolton, 1998). Customer will evaluate the recovery
efforts taken by the company following the service
failure. This is critical especially if it involves long
term or loyal customers.
Service recovery is important to return upset cus-
tomers to a state of satisfaction. This can be done if
the employees act quickly, being friendly, express
empathy and demonstrate generous manner in re-
solving customer’s problem (Stefan Michel, 2001).
A good recovery efforts will enhance customers’
opinions towards the company, promote positive
word of mouth, improve customer satisfaction and
develop long term relationship (S. Michel & Meuter,
2008). Service failure and recovery should not be
viewed as an obstacle, rather it should be seen as an
opportunity to improve weaknesses and learning
from mistakes. Komunda and Osarenkhoe (2012)
stated that service recovery may enable the tracking
of common complaints and a database could be de-
veloped to better manage it. As a result, the company
will become aware of the problems and it can be
avoided from occurring again.
2.3 Recovery satisfaction
Generally, customer satisfaction is defined as a cus-
tomer’s judgment towards a particular product or
service. It is a judgment that a product or service
provides a pleasurable level of consumption-related
fulfillment (Oliver, 1997). Customer satisfaction is a
critical issue in the area of marketing and consumer
behavior (Ghalandari, Babaeinia, & Jogh, 2012). It
has become a key component in measuring business
performance and guiding principle in the develop-
ment in new product or service (Feng & Yanru,
2013). Satisfied customers will enhance company’s
reputation by sharing positive experiences with oth-
ers.
Service failure is inevitable and therefore, compa-
nies will face challenging time to ensure satisfied
customers will remain loyal to them. Poor service
recovery will lead to double-deviation and may
threaten the relationship that has been developed for
years. An excellent recovery efforts will improve
customer’s overall satisfaction, promote brand loyal-
ty and positive word of mouth (Choi & La, 2013). In
specific, Kim et al. (2009) described recovery satis-
faction as a positive emotion perceived by the cus-
tomers as a result of service recovery efforts taken
by the company.
2.4 Justice theory in service recovery
Justice theory states that a customer evaluates a ser-
vice recovery attempt as fair or unfair (DeWitt, Ngu-
yen, & Marshall, 2008). A number of research in
western countries has considered the application of
justice theory in service recovery. According to Pat-
terson et al. (2006), justice theory was derived from
the social exchange and equity theory. It can be cate-
gorized into three dimensions namely distributive
justice, procedural justice, and interactional justice.
Justice theory has been used in a number of service
recovery studies including airline industry (Chang &
Chang, 2010); restaurant (Ok, 2004); retail industry
(Lin, 2012); and hotel industry (Prasongsukarn &
Patterson, 2012).
Previous service recovery studies demonstrated
that the three dimensions of justice theory influences
recovery satisfaction. According to Ok (2004), the
three dimensions of justice have positive effects on
recovery satisfaction in restaurant setting. Effective
service recovery will not only improve satisfaction,
however it can lead to trust and re-patronage inten-
tions (Wen & Chi, 2013). Ha and Jang (2009)
claimed that an effective service recovery will trans-
537
form upset customers to be satisfied which can pro-
mote long term relationship. Therefore, the follow-
ing proposition is derived from the aforementioned
discussion:
P1: Service recovery will influence recovery satis-
faction.
2.4.1 Distributive justice
Wen and Chi (2013) described distributive justice as
the outcome that the customer expect to receive dur-
ing service recovery and it should be equal to the
customer’s loss. In specific, Weun, Beatty, and Jones
(2004) defined distributive justice as the tangible
end result given to the initially frustrated customer.
Typical end results include a discount, cash refund,
replacement, amendment, etc. (Wen & Chi, 2013).
Prasongsukarn and Patterson (2012) claimed that
distributive justice was found to affect recovery sat-
isfaction in multi industry settings such as retail,
hospitality and auto repair. These findings proved
that monetary rewards are important to satisfy upset
customers (Ha & Jang, 2009). Therefore, based on
the preceding discussion, the following proposition
is developed:
P1a: Distributive justice will influence recovery sat-
isfaction.
2.4.2 Procedural justice
Procedural justice concerns with the procedures, pol-
icies, processes and rules involved in service recov-
ery (Smith et al., 1999). However, del Río-Lanza,
Vázquez-Casielles, and Díaz-Martín (2009) argued
that procedural justice deals with aspects such as ac-
cessibility, speed, process control, delay and flexibil-
ity in dealing with service failure. Based on both def-
initions, we defined procedural justice as the policies
and procedures that will help to solve customer’s
problem in timely manner. Previous research
demonstrated that procedural justice can influence
recovery satisfaction. A study in airline industry by
Nikbin et al. (2012) and Chang and Chang (2010)
indicated that procedural justice influences recovery
satisfaction. Therefore, the following proposition is
derived based on the previous discussion:
P1b: Procedural justice will influence recovery satis-
faction.
2.4.3 Interactional justice
Interactional justice refers to the customers’ percep-
tion regarding the way they are treated during the
service recovery process which includes respect, car-
ing, honesty and willingness to help (Wen & Chi,
2013). Sparks and McColl-Kennedy (2001) argued
that interactional justice concerns with the human in-
teractions during service recovery. Based on both
definitions, we summarized interactional justice as
the treatment and communication process involved
during service recovery process. Extant studies
claimed that interactional justice can influence cus-
tomers’ judgment towards company’s recovery ef-
fort. A study in banking and home construction in-
dustries shows that interactional justice influence
customer satisfaction (Maxham & Netemeyer,
2002). In addition, a study in airline industry by
Chang and Chang (2010) also found that interaction-
al justice affects recovery satisfaction. Based on the
preceding discussion, the following proposition is
developed:
P1c: Interactional justice will influence recovery sat-
isfaction.
2.5 The role of religiosity
In recent years, there is an emerging concern pertain-
ing to religiosity in global market (Swimberghe et
al., 2009). A number of issues pertaining to religiosi-
ty are still impending given the fact that this area is
still maturing (Tsarenko & Tojib, 2012). According
to Worthington et al. (2003), religiosity (also called
as religious commitment) is defined as the degree to
which an individual obey to their religious belief and
practice it in daily life.
Religious people is claimed to be more honest,
fair and nice compared to people without religious
orientation (Morgan, 1982). In service failure con-
text, Tsarenko and Tojib (2012) argued that highly
religious individual tend to be more forgiving com-
pared to less religious individual. Therefore, it is ex-
pected that being religious will influence the manner
an individual behave when service failure occurs. As
a result, it may affect their level of satisfaction and
future re-patronage intentions. This is supported by
Swimberghe et al. (2009) claiming that further re-
search is required to examine the buying behavior of
high and low religious people. This is due to the no-
tion that dissatisfied customers may perform one of
the following behaviors: stop buying from the com-
pany; share negative word of mouth with others; and
complain to the business owner or third party. The
emerging trend of religious awareness in the global
market evidenced that it is critical to further explore
this area, specifically in service failure perspective.
Therefore, the following proposition is developed:
P2: Religiosity will moderate the relationship be-
tween service recovery and recovery satisfaction.
P2a: Religiosity will moderate the relationship be-
tween distributive justice and recovery satisfaction.
P2b: Religiosity will moderate the relationship be-
tween procedural justice and recovery satisfaction.
P2c: Religiosity will moderate the relationship be-
tween interactional justice and recovery satisfaction.
3 CONCLUSION
The central issue discussed in this paper is the inte-
gration of religiosity in service recovery studies.
While the area of religiosity has been examined in
other marketing studies, less attention has been di-
rected to its role in service recovery context. The de-
veloping trend of religious awareness demonstrated
that this study is critical to be conducted. Theoreti-
cally, this study will contribute to the body of
knowledge in service recovery related area. Practi-
cally, this study will help service provider to be more
alert in treating frustrated customers when service
failure occurs. Low or highly religious people may
have different perception towards company’s efforts
in rectifying the problem. As mentioned earlier,
highly religious people tend to be more forgiving
when they experienced service failure compared to
the less religious people (Tsarenko & Tojib, 2012).
This paper also discusses the role of service re-
covery towards recovery satisfaction. Attaining cus-
tomer satisfaction following service failure is a chal-
lenging task for the organization. A successful
recovery may promote loyalty, however poor recov-
ery will lead to double-deviation and bad reputation.
The concept of justice theory in service recovery was
deliberated in this paper. Distributive justice (tangi-
ble compensation), procedural justice (policies and
procedures), and interactional justice (communica-
tion process) are the three dimensions of justice the-
ory that are believed to influence recovery satisfac-
tion.
4 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE
RESEARCH
This paper introduces the moderating role of religi-
osity on the relationship between service recovery
and recovery satisfaction. Future research may ex-
plore other potential variable such as personality
type to be examined. While most service recovery
studies were conducted in western countries, less at-
tention has been given in Asian region. Therefore fu-
ture researcher is suggested to conduct such studies
in their country which may yield different findings.
Future research is recommended to conduct service
recovery studies in other industries that have never
been examined. Typical areas that have been investi-
gated includes restaurant, online service, retailing,
hotel and banking sector.
5 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The work was supported by the Ministry of Higher
Education (MOHE) via Exploratory Research Grant
Scheme of Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM).
Research name: Integrating Intercultural Compe-
tence for Superior Service Satisfaction: A Structural
Equation Modeling in Dynamic Economy of Malay-
sia and Turkey, grant no. PY//2012/01358-
Q.K130000.2563.04H80.
6 REFERENCES
Bernardo, M., Llach, J., Marimon, F., & Alonso-Almeida, M.
M. (2013). The balance of the impact of quality and recov-
ery on satisfaction: The case of e-travel. Total Quality
Management and Business Excellence, 24(11-12), 1390-
1404.
Chang, Y.-W., & Chang, Y.-H. (2010). Does service recovery
affect satisfaction and customer loyalty? An empirical study
of airline services. Journal of Air Transport Management,
16(6), 340-342. doi:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jairtraman.2010.05.001
Choi, B., & La, S. (2013). The impact of corporate social re-
sponsibility (CSR) and customer trust on the restoration of
loyalty after service failure and recovery. Journal of Ser-
vices Marketing, 27(3), 223-233.
del Río-Lanza, A. B., Vázquez-Casielles, R., & Díaz-Martín,
A. M. (2009). Satisfaction with service recovery: Perceived
justice and emotional responses. Journal of Business Re-
search, 62(8), 775-781.
DeWitt, T., Nguyen, D. T., & Marshall, R. (2008). Exploring
Customer Loyalty Following Service Recovery The Mediat-
ing Effects of Trust and Emotions. Journal of Service Re-
search, 10(3), 269-281.
Dong, B., Evans, K. R., & Zou, S. (2008). The effects of cus-
tomer participation in co-created service recovery. Journal
of the Academy of Marketing Science, 36(1), 123-137.
Feng, J., & Yanru, H. (2013). Study on the Relationships
Among Customer Satisfaction, Brand Lotalty and Repur-
chase Intention. Journal of Theoretical & Applied Infor-
mation Technology, 49(1).
Ghalandari, K., Babaeinia, L., & Jogh, M. G. G. (2012). Inves-
tigation of the Effect of Perceived Justice on Post-Recovery
Overall Satisfaction, Post-Recovery Revisit Intention and
Post-Recovery Word-of-Mouth Intention from Airline In-
dustry in Iran: The Role of Corporate Image. World Applied
Sciences Journal, 18(7), 957-970.
Gronroos, C. (1988). Service quality: the six criteria of good
perceived service quality. Review of Business, 9(3).
Ha, J., & Jang, S. S. (2009). Perceived justice in service recov-
ery and behavioral intentions: The role of relationship
quality. International Journal of Hospitality Management,
28(3), 319-327.
Kim, T. T., Kim, W. G., & Kim, H.-B. (2009). The effects of
perceived justice on recovery satisfaction, trust, word-of-
mouth, and revisit intention in upscale hotels. Tourism
Management, 30(1), 51-62.
Komunda, M., & Osarenkhoe, A. (2012). Remedy or cure for
service failure?: Effects of service recovery on customer
satisfaction and loyalty. Business Process Management
Journal, 18(1), 82-103. doi: 10.1108/14637151211215028
539
Lin, W. B. (2012). The determinants of consumers' switching
intentions after service failure. Total Quality Management
and Business Excellence, 23(7-8), 837-854.
Lusch, R. F., & Vargo, S. L. (2006). Service-dominant logic:
reactions, reflections and refinements. Marketing theory,
6(3), 281-288.
Mattila, A. S. (2001). The effectiveness of service recovery in a
multi-industry setting. Journal of Services Marketing,
15(7), 583-596. doi: 10.1108/08876040110407509
Maxham, J. G., & Netemeyer, R. G. (2002). Modeling custom-
er perceptions of complaint handling over time: The effects
of perceived justice on satisfaction and intent. Journal of
Retailing, 78(4), 239-252.
Michel, S. (2001). Analyzing service failures and recoveries: a
process approach. International Journal of Service Industry
Management, 12(1), 20-33. doi:
10.1108/09564230110382754
Michel, S., & Meuter, M. L. (2008). The service recovery par-
adox: true but overrated? International Journal of Service
Industry Management, 19(4), 441-457.
Morgan, S. P. (1982). A Research Note on Religion and Moral-
ity: Are Religious People Nice People. Soc. F., 61, 683.
Nikbin, D., Armesh, H., Heydari, A., & Jalalkamali, M. (2011).
The effects of perceived justice in service recovery on firm
reputation and repurchase intention in airline industry. Afri-
can Journal of Business Management, 5(23), 9814-9822.
Nikbin, D., Ismail, I., Marimuthu, M., & Jalalkamali, M.
(2010). Perceived justice in service recovery and recovery
satisfaction: the moderating role of corporate image. Inter-
national Journal of Marketing Studies, 2(2), p47.
Nikbin, D., Ismail, I., Marimuthu, M., & Salarzehi, H. (2012).
The Relationship of Service Failure Attributions, Service
Recovery Justice and Recovery Satisfaction in the Context
of Airlines. Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tour-
ism, 12(3), 232-254.
Ok, C. (2004). The effectiveness of service recovery and its
role in building long-term relationships with customers in a
restaurant setting.
Oliver, R. L. (1997). Satisfaction: A behavioral perspective on
the consumer. Satisfaction: A Behavioral Perspective on the
Consumer.
Patterson, P. G., Cowley, E., & Prasongsukarn, K. (2006). Ser-
vice failure recovery: The moderating impact of individual-
level cultural value orientation on perceptions of justice. In-
ternational Journal of Research in Marketing, 23(3), 263-
277. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2006.02.004
Prasongsukarn, K., & Patterson, P. G. (2012). An extended
service recovery model: the moderating impact of temporal
sequence of events. Journal of Services Marketing, 26(7),
510-520.
Riscinto-Kozub, K. A. (2008). The effects of service recovery
satisfaction on customer loyalty and future behavioral inten-
tions: An Exploratory study in the luxury hotel industry:
ProQuest.
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(3),
356-372.
Sparks, B. A., & McColl-Kennedy, J. R. (2001). Justice strate-
gy options for increased customer satisfaction in a services
recovery setting. Journal of Business Research, 54(3), 209-
218.
Swimberghe, K., Sharma, D., & Flurry, L. (2009). An explora
tory investigation of the consumer religious commitment and its
influence on store loyalty and consumer complaint inten-
tions. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 26(5), 340-347.
Tsarenko, Y., & Tojib, D. (2012). The role of personality char-
acteristics and service failure severity in consumer for-
giveness and service outcomes. Journal of Marketing Man-
agement, 28(9-10), 1217-1239.
Wen, B., & Chi, C. G.-q. (2013). Examine the cognitive and af-
fective antecedents to service recovery satisfaction: A field
study of delayed airline passengers. International Journal
of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 25(3), 306-327.
Weun, S., Beatty, S. E., & Jones, M. A. (2004). The impact of
service failure severity on service recovery evaluations
andpost-recovery relationships. Journal of Services Market-
ing, 18(2), 133-146. doi: 10.1108/08876040410528737
Worthington, E. L., Wade, N. G., Hight, T. L., Ripley, J. S.,
McCullough, M. E., Berry, J. W., & O'Connor, L. (2003).
The Religious Commitment Inventory 10: Development, re-
finement, and validation of a brief scale for research and
counseling. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 50(1), 84.
