Consumers' Complaint Behaviour. Taxonomy, Typology and Determinants

Consumers’ complaint behaviour. Taxonomy, typology and determinants: Towards a uniﬁed ontology Received (in revised form): 16th August, 2003

Dominique Crie´ is Professor of marketing at the University of Sciences and Technologies of Lille, in the Business Administration Department (IAE). He manages the postgraduate degree course: statistical specialisation for marketing databases. He is also a marketing consultant and statistician, member of the Association Franc¸ aise de Marketing and of the Socie´te´Franc¸ aise de Statistiques. His research focuses on the customer relationship, particularly in relation to satisfaction, loyalty and retention.

Abstract Complaint behaviour is a set of consumer dissatisfaction responses. It is an explicit expression of dissatisfaction, but dissatisfaction is only one determinant of this behaviour. Complaint behaviour can be analysed as various types of response but also as a process. This paper proposes an integrated framework of the various theories of complaint behaviour leading toward a uniﬁed ontology and to interpreting it from a new perspective.

INTRODUCTION ‘complainers’ and ‘non-complainers’, this This paper reviews a concept still paper tries to track down the main relatively rarely considered by companies: dimensions of the CCB taxonomy consumer complaint behaviour. Within throughastructuralisationofits the framework of the relationship determinants within a diachronic paradigm, complaint behaviour is a approach — the objective being to powerful signal which companies should propose a clarified conceptual and take into account. On the one hand, it theoretical framework to integrate the gives an organisation a last chance to large variety of works on the subject. retain the customer, if the organisation The conclusion highlights a synthesis of reacts appropriately, on the other hand it this conceptual structure with regard to a is a legitimate and ethical act toward the unified ontology. consumer. Generally, but not exclusively, complaint behaviour is one of the A TAXONOMY OF THE TYPES OF responses to perceived dissatisfaction in RESPONSE TO DISSATISFACTION the post-purchase phase. In the first A dissatisfied consumer may adopt several Dominique Crie´ section of the paper, a taxonomy of typesofresponse,classificationofwhich IAE de Lille, 104, Avenue du Peuple response styles used by dissatisfied may be delicate. The taxonomy of Belge, 59 043 Lille Ce´dex, consumers is proposed. Then consumer responses first requires a distinction France. complaint behaviour (CCB) is defined between the notions of response and of Tel: ϩ33 (0)3 20 12 34 64; Fax: ϩ33 (0)3 20 12 34 48; and situated with regard to these various action to be established. Indeed, the term E-mail: [email protected] types of response. Finally, after clustering ‘action’ implies a very specific behaviour,

60 Database Marketing & Customer Strategy Management Vol. 11, 1, 60–79 ᭧ Henry Stewart Publications 1741–2447 (2003) Consumers’ complaint behaviour

Table 1: A taxonomy of the types of response to dissatisfaction

Towards enitity

Public Private Response type (Sellers, manufacturers, ofﬁcial organisations, (Family, friends, associations, justice) relations)

Behavioural Complaint Word of mouth Legal action Boycott/leaving Return of the item Request for repair

Non-behavioural No action, with or without modiﬁcation of the attitude Forget or forgive

while the term ‘response’ contains several Themoreexpensiveandcomplexthe modalities which are not exclusively product, the more consumers are behavioural, notably change of attitude inclined to initiate public action, or inactivity. This distinction establishes a however the greater likelihood is that first dimension. they will stay inactive or choose private The second is represented by the action.2–4 entities towards which responses are The authors of the firststreamof directed: the public one includes sellers, literature are numerous, but Hirschman’s manufacturers and consumer associations work remains standard in the or legal action; the private one includes conceptualisation of responses to family, friends or relatives. dissatisfaction through the model ‘Exit, Finally, responses show different Voic e and Loy alty ’.Exitisanactiveand intensities according to the two previous destructive response to dissatisfaction, dimensions. Responses may vary from exhibited by a break of the relationship inactivity to legal action — either simply with the object (brand, product, retailer, to express dissatisfaction or to obtain supplier...). The verbal response (Voice) repair or compensation (Table 1). is a constructive response with an The heterogeneity of these various expectationofchangeinanorganisation’s response types may be partially explained practices, policies and responses; it is by the cause and intensity of characterised by complaints towards dissatisfaction and by the nature and friends, consumer associations and importance of the product or service of relevant organisations. The third type of concern. On the other hand, consumers response (Loyalty) has two aspects, may mix or connect several response constructive and passive, the individual types for the same dissatisfaction. This hoping that things will evolve in a aspect is relatively neglected by the positive way. For Brown and Swartz,5 it literature, although Hirschman1 notes that is especially a feeling of impotence that is complaint and exit are not two the cause of this behavioural loyalty. symmetric elements: when a customer ‘The neglect of the incident and the leaves the company, he/she loses ‘the inherent inactivity’ can, however, be opportunity’ to use their voice, while if considered as evidence for loyalty. he/she uses the complaint first, he/she is Research designed to explain the always free to leave later if the complaint various types of response to dissatisfaction does not succeed. So exit can be a is limited. Scales have been created for substitute for and complement to a this purpose by Day et al.6 but they are complaint. without methodological and

᭧ Henry Stewart Publications 1741-2447 (2003) Vol. 11, 1, 60–79 Database Marketing & Customer Strategy Management 61 Crie´

psychometric validation. Only Bearden We rne rfe l t 14 consider that the complaint and Teel7 have investigated the various is ‘an attempt of the customer to change types of response using a Guttman scale. an unsatisfactory situation’. Finally, The data are collected from five items of Singh15 suggests that this behaviour, increasing intensity: (1) family and friends activated at an emotional or sentimental warning, (2) return of the item and/or level by a perceived dissatisfaction, is part complaint, (3) contact with the of the more general framework of manufacturer, (4) contact with consumer responses to dissatisfaction which consists associations or official organisations and of two dimensions (see also Day and (5) legal action, notably when the Landon16). The first dimension, grounded customer does not obtain satisfaction completely or in part in actions initiated with the seller.8 Empirically validated, by the consumer (conveying expression this scale does not, however, take into of his/her dissatisfaction not only to the account the non-behavioural responses seller, but also to third parties, friends or highlighted by previous research, and a relations17,18), is behavioural but does not single item relates to private action.9 Of necessarily entail action towards the a rather formative nature, every item company; it is essentially within this contributes in its own way to the dimension that CCB should be development of the intensity of the considered. The second dimension refers responses. Day10 confirms the relevance to absence of action by the consumer, of the use of such a scale. for example when he/she forgets a The main aim of this taxonomy is to generative episode of dissatisfaction.19,20 clarify the various responses a dissatisfied In this way, CCB must, rather, be consumer could use, in order to track conceived as a process, ie its final down more precisely those which the manifestation does not directly depend company can observe directly. on its initiating factors but on evaluation of the situation by the consumer and of its evolution over time. DEFINING CONSUMER COMPLAINT So, CCB really constitutes a subset of BEHAVIOUR all possible responses to perceived Among the various types of response to dissatisfaction around a purchase episode, dissatisfaction, some of them more during consumption or during possession direcly concern CCB. The first of the good (or service). In fact, the conceptual base of this phenomenon notion of ‘complaint behaviour’ includes concerning post-purchase was stated at a more general terminology which also the end of the 1970s.11 Jacoby and involves the notions of protest, Jaccard12 define it as ‘an action begun by communication (word of mouth) or the individual who entails a recommendation to third parties21 and communication of something negative to even the notion of boycott. This notion a product (service), either towards the is conceptually inserted in a set of company or towards a third entity’.For explicit demonstrations, generally towards Day et al.,13 it is the consequence ‘of a the seller, of a consumer’s dissatisfaction. given act of consumption, following It seems then that it is necessary to which the consumer is confronted with include in the definition of CCB a set of an experience generating a high responses, heterogeneous in their targets dissatisfaction, of sufficientimpactsothat — the study of this behaviour not being it is, neither likened psychologically, nor separable from understanding of all the quickly forgotten’. Fornell and responses to dissatisfaction.

62 Database Marketing & Customer Strategy Management Vol. 11, 1, 60–79 ᭧ Henry Stewart Publications 1741–2447 (2003) Consumers’ complaint behaviour

DISSATISFACTION

Behavioural Non-behavioural response response

Towards company Towards market Inactivity Change of attitude Perceptible by the Not perceptible company by the company

Complaint Legal Leaving Negative word Repeat purchase or action of mouth behavioural loyalty

Simple Repair complaint compensation

Figure 1: Responses to dissatisfaction and complaint behaviour

In the rest of this paper, therefore, the ‘complainers’ can be placed but term ‘complaint behaviour’ is used in the without really distinguishing particular conceptual meaning of a public groups. These are opposed to the behavioral response to dissatisfaction. ‘non-complainers’,24–27 in this way these So, for a company, only part of these works are more concerned with responses will be perceptible, including responses to dissatisfaction than CCB in complaint in the sense described its strict sense. They are poor in terms previously (Figure 1). On the other of possible categories and are not hand, it is the retailer who will be most grounded in a rigorous analysis of affected by CCB. The manufacturer is response styles. Certain typologies seldom sought out, so such crucial nevertheless allow a few speciﬁc information reaches him only rarely, and behaviours in the expression of CCB often not at all.22,23 to be extracted, for example the ‘irritated actives’,28,29 the ‘activists’,30 the ‘complainers’,the‘irates’,31 the A TYPOLOGY OF DISSATISFIED ‘voicers’,32 the ‘slightly offended’ or the CONSUMERS ‘champions’.33 Several authors have tried to For Hirschman34 the complaint must individualise groups of consumers with be considered as feedback on the quality regardtothetypeofresponseadopted delivered by the company, the in the wider framework of ‘complainers’ are called ‘alert customers’ dissatisfaction. Most researchers offer a (because they allow the company to ‘normative typology’ within which the improve the product or service) as

᭧ Henry Stewart Publications 1741-2447 (2003) Vol. 11, 1, 60–79 Database Marketing & Customer Strategy Management 63 Crie´

Table 2: Main types of complainers

Behaviour Public action Authors Private action Authors

Complaint Voicers Dart and Freeman35 Slightly offended Weiser52 (prostestation) Champions Weiser36 Irates Dart53 Complainers Etzel37 Singh54 Shuptrine38 Bearden39 Day40 Gronhaug and Zaltman41 Singh42 Keng43

Request for Active upsets Masson44 repair Irritated Warland45 Singh46

Measures of Detractors Weiser47 Lost in action Weiser55 retaliation Activists Pfaff48 Warland49 Singh50 Dart51

opposed to ‘inert customers’.The will be observed. Finally, within the complaint is then a factor of framework of a well-established enhancement for company performance. relationship a majority of ‘champions’ or Taken as a whole the typology of ‘slightly offended people’ would be dissatisfied consumers overlaps with that expected. of the responses to dissatisfaction and develops its structure at the same time as the intensity of the CCB modalities TOWARDS A DIACHRONIC chosen by consumers, going from simple APPROACH TO CCB complaint to retaliatory measures in a The literature does not propose a register of public or private actions systematisation in the organisation of (Table 2). antecedents and determinants of CCB. Generally speaking, the various This deficiency is essentially due to the typologies outlined do not allow retailers fact that CCB is regarded as an or manufacturers to appreciate the immediate act and not as a process. In complexity and variety of CCB in order fact, this concept lacks a clearly identified to respond in an effective way, but it is theoretical framework which allows the likely that certain behaviours will be organisation of a heterogeneous set of more specific in a given situation. For factors that initiate and modulate it and example, within the framework of a which can take into account dissatisfaction bound to durable goods resemblances and differences that also (high price and high commitment), one comply with the more global notion of would tend to observe among dissatisfaction responses. Indeed, an ‘complainers’ a stronger proportion of ambiguity in the study of CCB results ‘irritated actives’ or ‘irates’. In a weakly from the fact that it should not include, competitive market they will tend to be by semantic definition, the ‘activists’. If the usual quality level of non-behavioural aspect of responses to products is weak, ‘detractors’ and ‘irates’ dissatisfaction or customers leaving. The

64 Database Marketing & Customer Strategy Management Vol. 11, 1, 60–79 ᭧ Henry Stewart Publications 1741–2447 (2003) Consumers’ complaint behaviour

diachronic nature of the phenomenon of of its cause and for the evaluation of the complaint could probably explain possible responses, there follows a phase similarities and differences which exist of decision and of action which will in between these two concepts. fact reflect only the residual dissatisfaction The number of implied variables at the conclusion of the process. This strengthens the idea that CCB is not an remaining dissatisfaction can nevertheless instantaneous phenomenon, it is the be reinforced to reach a higher level outcome of a process of preliminary than that of the initial dissatisfaction, for evaluations under the influence of example if the consumer is strengthened initiating and modulating factors. This in his/her decision, either by the approach also raises the question of the problem worsening, by the salesperson’s effect of time on a consumer’sinitial attitude or by the encouragement of impulse to complain. CCB occurs after third parties. In that case, measures taken increasing reflection by the consumer.56–57 by the consumer can be more significant and Stephens and Gwinner,58 offer the than those initially intended. Nevertheless first longitudinal approach to CCB on the process does not stop with the the basis of in-depth interviews. For voicing of the complaint, it also includes them, CCB results from a double evaluation of the company’s response and cognitive evaluation.59 The first is concludes with the final behaviour which defined as a process by which the ensues from it (repurchase or exit). individual estimates how much influence It is then advisable to restore, in a a particular situation, in a given diachronic framework, various streams of environment, has on his/her well being. literature whose main object is to explain The second may be analysed as a the result of this process. Indeed, when problem resolution strategy. The CCB researchers take time into account in depends then on the situation and on the CCB, it is essentially the available time to psychological resources of the individuals. protest that is considered60 and not the Within this framework, it is then period separating the episode of relevant to think that generally the dissatisfaction from the response to it. But, intentiontocomplainorprotestmust the procedural knowledges are connected occur at the same time as dissatisfaction in time. They echo information relative and under the influence of initiating to processes, that is to say sequences of factors. This primary intention is then actions, or sequences of reasoning in the the object of various distorting or sense that they order, or at least structure, modulating factors meaning that the final the progress of several operations, possibly outcome is often different from that several procedures. This cognitive intended, it can be highly altered or just approach to complaint behaviour places it not come about at all. This idea then totally within the framework of a decision leads to the consideration of a number of process. non-behavioural responses to dissatisfaction or responses not perceptible by the company (cf. Figure 1) as being TOWARDS AN INTEGRATION OF in some way failed CCBs. It is thus THE VARIOUS ANTECEDENTS AND relevant to analyse how this intention DETERMINANTS OF CCB arises and changes over time. After a In a simplistic way and besides its phase of initiation represented by the diachronic aspect, it is possible to initial level of dissatisfaction, then a phase distinguish within the conceptual part of of reflection necessary for the integration the literature related to the determinants

᭧ Henry Stewart Publications 1741-2447 (2003) Vol. 11, 1, 60–79 Database Marketing & Customer Strategy Management 65 Crie´

Psychological sphere DISSATISFACTION - Sociocultural factors - Frustration/assurance - Learning - Attribution - Attitude/complaint Negative word of mouth - Experiences - Educational level Complaint TYPE OF Legal action RESPONSE Inactivity Economic sphere Leaving

- Structure of the market - Frequency of purchases - Interactions buyer / seller - Costs of the complaint - Probability of success Ethical sphere - Expected profit - Incomes - Switching barriers - Equity - Loyalty - Information

Figure 2: Antecedents and determinants of CCB

of CCB, three spheres of factors which to complaint to be distinguished from a interact with different weights to lead, long one. This distinction, notably, can eventually, to CCB or to other take into account the role of time and of modalities of response to dissatisfaction both types of factors on CCB. In a short such as defined above. path the influence of the modulating The psychological sphere is made up factors is less, the complaint occurring of individual variables reflecting the mostly at the sale point, almost propensity to CCB. The economic simultaneously with delivery of the sphere groups together elements of cost product or service. It is an immediate and exchange structures. Finally, the emotional reaction rather than an ethical sphere incorporates transactional extended process. In a long, extended equity, concentrating on the perception path, however, there are more of the value of the link with the modulating factors which seem to shape company and on the accuracy and the type of response. (The variables of helpfulness of the information given, for the ethical sphere work as initiators, example, regarding ways to resolve the those of the economic sphere have a disputes, etc (Figure 2). modulator role and those of the On the other hand, the diachronic psychological sphere can be classified as approach to CCB requires its various either type.) antecedents and determinants to be On the whole, four entities are anchored on two points: first on the directly involved in CCB: the product or initiating factors and secondly on the service, the customer, the supplier and factors modulating the mode of the episode of dissatisfaction. These complaint. This point of view allows not various actors allow, within the only integration of the various framework of a diachronic approach, the explanatory theories and the synthesis multiple antecedents and determinants of described above but also for a short path CCB (Table 3) to be re-ordered.

66 Database Marketing & Customer Strategy Management Vol. 11, 1, 60–79 ᭧ Henry Stewart Publications 1741–2447 (2003) Consumers’ complaint behaviour

Table 3: Various determinants of CCB according to the stage and the actor

Stage of CB Actor Initiation of CB Modulation of CB

Product/service Dissatisfaction level Structure of the market Alternatives Purchase rate Price, complexity of the product/service

Customer Perceived frustration Attitude, Experience/CB Perceived inequity Learning, Information/CB Assurance (self control) Loyalty Will to act Education, Age, Sex Primary evaluation of the dissatisfaction Ethnicity Way of life Secondary evaluation of response possibilities

Supplier Quality defect Absence of management of post Incident/product or service purchase Ease of access to the company Switching barriers Switching costs Customer/seller interactions Size of the company, business sector

Episode Dissatisfaction attribution Expected proﬁt Situation, Time-spatial simultaneity of the Transaction costs of CB circumstances dissatisfaction and response possibilities Probability of success Importance of consumer organisations

Initiating factors of CCB Westbrook64 and Ping65 on the notion of Several factors may lead to CCB. complaint without dissatisfaction66). It is Introducing and determining, partly, a the activating factor of the process.67 consumer’s choice of a given type of Besides, Oliver68 underlines the existing response to dissatisfaction, they allow on relationship between the intensity of the the one hand a better understanding of dissatisfaction and this behaviour.69 consumers’ motivation for CCB and, on Grandbois et al.,70 Richins,71 Maute and the other hand, a forecast of what Forrester72 prove that the gravity of the response will be the most likely to be problem is correlated in a positive way adopted. Ordinarily consumers need to with the various responses to be dissatisﬁed in order to complain but dissatisfaction including CCB. The more other variables are necessary to switch the dissatisfaction increases, the more the from dissatisfaction to complaint. Such verbal complaint strengthens and the variablesmaylieinattributionofthe more the probability of leaving the cause of dissatisfaction or in company grows. For Singh and Pandya,73 psychosociological characteristics of the the relationship ‘intensity-type of individual consumer (see Table 3). response’ is not linear and admits threshold effects. When the level of dissatisfaction exceeds a given threshold Dissatisfaction consumers tend to use either negative Dissatisfaction is a necessary antecedent word of mouth or leaving or appeal to a of CCB, but is often not sufﬁcient61,62 third party. On the other hand, the (see also Jacoby and Jaccard,63 relationship between attitude to the

᭧ Henry Stewart Publications 1741-2447 (2003) Vol. 11, 1, 60–79 Database Marketing & Customer Strategy Management 67 Crie´

complaint and CCB itself can be Psychosociological factors modulated by the intensity of the Some individual characteristics are to be dissatisfaction.74–76 considered as initiators of CCB, although they can also play a modulating role according to the situation (Table 3). Attribution of the cause of the Fornell and Westbrook,81 according to dissatisfaction Mischel,82 associate CCB with the feeling To lead to CCB, the consumer has to of frustration felt by a dissatisfied identify clearly the party responsible for consumer. Frustration arises not only his or her dissatisfaction during a given when the objective assigned to a given consumption episode (Table 3). In behaviour is blocked or interrupted numerous cases it is the consumer before its fulfilment, but also when the himself/herself, for example when result achieved has a lower level than he/she judges he/she did not make the that sought, or when its realisation right choice. So, even if for Valle77 the requires more resources than the attribution of responsibility for consumer can, wants or expects to spend dissatisfaction operates as an to reach the desired objective. This intermediary between the confusion and feeling is also present when the means to the response which follow, it is reach the satisfaction, both at the advisable to classify it as an initiating resources level and at the wanted object factor of CCB. level (product or brand), are reduced or According to Weiner et al.,78 a success suppressed. Along the same lines, or failure can be attributed either to frustration can arise in situations of elements under the control of the purchase intention (unavailability of the individual (internal cause[s]), or to product or of the brand) or in environment or situational factors post-purchase situations (dissatisfaction of (external cause[s]). On the other hand, use or of ownership). The more the performance can be attributed to substantial the frustration, the greater the invariant factors (stable) or evolving with risk of aggressiveness and CCB. time (unstable). The type of attribution For Stephens and Gwinner83 the stress achieved by the consumer determines a of dissatisfaction adds to the daily stress priori the response that may be chosen. If and CCB is connected to a double an external attribution is necessary for a evaluation of the situation during a private type action, a legal action or a cognitive process. Three constituents request for repair, in the case of an form the primary evaluation of the stress: internal attribution it is especially (1) the level of modification of the inactivity which dominates.79 Usually, individual objectives; (2) the incongruity consumers who perceive the cause of between these objectives and the their dissatisfaction as being stable (the incident; (3) the level of the person’sego same problem may recur) or controllable infringement (humiliation, self-esteem, (the individual thinks that the retailer ethical values). A second evaluation of could have prevented the trouble) are possible response strategies is then more inclined to leave the product or initiated according to: (1) the the company and to engage in negative responsibility attribution for the word of mouth than those who think confusion; (2) the possibility of solving that the problem has little chance of the problem (capacities of the individual, recurring and that the supplier could not probability of success); (3) the feeling prevent it (see also Folkes80). that things will go better afterwards. If

68 Database Marketing & Customer Strategy Management Vol. 11, 1, 60–79 ᭧ Henry Stewart Publications 1741–2447 (2003) Consumers’ complaint behaviour

the resulting stress of the primary thus be immediate, but it can also take evaluation can be reduced by a solving place at a distance from the act of strategy (secondarily estimated), the purchase. In the same way, the response probability of CCB is great. If, on the to dissatisfaction can be either immediate other hand, this strategy risks increasing or deferred. So the CCB can consist of the initial stress, the main probability rather a short path in the case of a turns out to be a non-behavioural dissatisfaction on the spot and of an response or a response towards the immediate response, or a long circuit in market (see Figure 1). the case of delayed dissatisfaction with Other individual characteristics may regard to the purchase act or of a also influence the start of a complaint postponed response. It is then, especially process,84 eg loyalty to the brand, in this last situation, that numerous product or supplier; the level of quality variables can intervene to modify the assessment, the educational level and consumer’s actual response, by tastes; the ability to detect quality moderating or aggravating it: ultimately differences (a function of experience) and the intensity of the CCB will thus the acquired level of information; depend on an evaluation of the situation perception of the ‘cost/profit’ ratio of during a temporal process. The market thepossibleactions. structure, sociocultural characteristics or For Lapidus and Pinkerton,85 the evaluation of the various costs associated consumer–retailer relationship is one of with CCB will act as modulators of the social exchange and, therefore, equity process outcome. theory may be applied in order to explain the initiation of CCB. The consumer compares his/her The market structure inputs/outputs ratio with those that The market structure can be regarded as he/she perceives to be received by the an element influencing the response type seller. Naturally this comparison can be choice adopted by a dissatisfied consumer biased according to the trend (positive or (see Table 3). For Hirschman,92 negative) of the revealed inequity. The consumers are ready to voice their complaint appears then as an attempt to complaints in two circumstances: (1) the reduce the perceived inequity (see also way they balance the certainty of leaving Blodgett et al.86). Secondly, the costs and the uncertainty of an improvement inherent in the complaint and its in the product or service quality and (2) perceived outcome can be considered as the estimation they make of their inputs and outputs of this theory. capacity to influence the organisation by Finally, learning theory can also be voicing their concerns. These two factors mentioned: the inclination to CCB is are far from being independent. Fornell essentially a function of past and Didow93 situate CCB in the larger experiences87–90 and of their outcome.91 field of rational choice — with the slight difference that choice in economic theory is in the pre-purchase period, Modulator factors of CCB while CCB is generally a post-purchase Dissatisfaction can be organised around phenomenon. The objects of choice are two congruent factors: the former is also different: products and services in situational, the latter temporal. It can the first case, type of response in the indeed occur where the product is second. In this theoretical framework, purchased or the service is delivered and they show that verbal action can be

᭧ Henry Stewart Publications 1741-2447 (2003) Vol. 11, 1, 60–79 Database Marketing & Customer Strategy Management 69 Crie´

expressed as a preference function and as The attractiveness of the alternatives or the possibility of purchasing elsewhere. the availability of substitutable goods Indeed, in a restricted competitive shows a strong relationship with the environment, verbal action will be the response type adopted by the consumer.102 only possible action for a dissatisfied In the same way, the more important the consumer.94,95 In contrast, when company the more the number of competitors are numerous, the customer’s complaints.103,104 leaving becomes the most likely reaction Day et al.105 classify in three categories and his/her action is then situated at the the factors which can influence the market level (see Figure 1). Therefore, the propensity to CCB: (1) the circumstances market structure appears as a powerful defining the interests at work and determinant of CCB. On the other hand, evaluation of the costs and likely profits of and within this framework, sensitivity of a search for compensation; (2) the the various customer segments, either to characteristics of the individuals or the price or quality, shapes the dominant situation surrounding the costs and the response type to dissatisfaction. Those purely psychological profits of alternative sensitive to price may leave the company, actions, as well as the general tendency of those sensitive to quality are more the mediation interventions; (3) market inclined to complain.96 conditions and the legal climate. For Day It also seems that buyer–seller et al., this latter category determines the interaction frequency (ie purchase rate) probability of a favourable outcome to the plays a part in the preference for verbal action taken. Generally speaking this type action.97 Themorefrequentthese of action will also depend on the nature interactions the fewer the public actions.98 of the product or service, the usable On the other hand, Barksdale et al.99 channels of complaint and the third report that the lower the level of purchase parties which could intervene. atthesamesupplier,thegreaterthe On the other hand, for Andreasen and tendency to CCB. New purchases lead to Best,106 the inclination of consumers to more complaints and the usual suppliers perceive problems depends on the nature receive more complaints than the new of the exchange. For services this ones. propensity is greatest, because they are, by For Weiser,100 thedegreeofeaseof nature, more difficult to assess (see access to the company and the willingness Shuptrine and Wenglorz,107 Bearden and of the customer to complain are Masson108). But there is also a unit of time determining elements in the choice of a and place during service delivery which response type. In a more specificway, favours CCB. Referring to the attribution Andreasen101 emphasises, within the theory, Zeithaml and Bitner109 consider framework of nearly monopolistic markets that because the customer is an actor in or markets perceived as such, that the service delivery, the customer appropriates response type is a function of the: more willingly a part of responsibility in perceived heterogeneity of the offer his/her dissatisfaction and tends to protest quality; level of knowledge; level of less often. perceived switching costs; probability of success of a verbal action both for the individual and the community; supposed Sociocultural factors complaint level of other consumers; and Some sociocultural factors have to be the degree of loyalty to the product, acknowledged as modulators of the brand or supplier. complaint process (see Table 3). For Day

70 Database Marketing & Customer Strategy Management Vol. 11, 1, 60–79 ᭧ Henry Stewart Publications 1741–2447 (2003) Consumers’ complaint behaviour

et al.,110 (1) the standards of life and the (21.1 per cent) which is related to the effectiveness of the marketing system, (2) consumer’s information level. Obviously the degree of regulation and control of these proportions can vary with the economic activities and marketing opinion that consumers have about the practices and (3) the availability of possibility of resolution of their problem information to help consumers make their according to the sector or company choice or to know where to complain, concerned.118 represent three groups of characteristics to Gronhaug and Zaltman119 show that be taken into account for a cross-cultural economic indicators such as income have approach to the phenomenon. only a weak explanatory power and that it Richins,111 within the framework of an is the same for demographic factors.120–123 international comparison, shows that in For Singh124 the ‘complainers’ tend to the USA the factors most correlated to have superior incomes, a higher CCB are price, the difficulty the educational level, are still working and are consumer faces in resolving the confusion younger (also Bearden et al.125). Laforge126 by himself and the attribution of the cause indeed shows that elderly people of dissatisfaction. In the Netherlands complain less, this in agreement with the Richins found the correlating factors were sociological theory of learned helplessness price, responsibility for the damage and its which makes the individual passive felt intensity. The most determinative because he/she perceives the situation as variables remain the attribution of uncontrollable. responsibility and the perceived consequences of a complaint, two variables less correlated to CCB in the The costs of the complaint American sample. In reference to the works of Landon,127 Cornwell, Bligh and Babakus112 clearly the profit of a complaint is a function of highlight that ethnic origin plays an the result minus the cost of complaint. important role in CCB especially through This result is itself estimated with regard values and the way of life. Webster113 also to the importance and the nature of the finds an influence of ethnic factors when damage sustained. The consumer’s the effect of social variables is controlled. preference for verbal action is then Furthermore, women generally have a related to the expected value of the greater inclination to complain and people complaint outcome (connected with the living in rural areas are more prone to importance of the dissatisfaction) minus negative word of mouth.114 the associated costs.128 The latter depend For Farhangmehr and Silva,115 notably on the image of the company, educational level is a determining variable; especially in the resolution of disputes, the higher it is the more consumers tend on the consumer’s experience of CCB to complain in a dissatisfaction situation and on the nature of the dispute. An (see Gronhaug,116 Morganosky and arbitration is thus achieved between cost Buckley117). In their study, the reasons for and profitofeverypossibleactionsoas silence on the part of the consumer are: to gain maximum utility.129 the effort and waste of time involved Gronhaug and Gilly130 use transaction (44.7 per cent) which can be compared costs theory131 in order to explain the with the expected gain; the feeling of not various consumer responses to being understood or that the problem will dissatisfaction. Three dimensions of this not be resolved (30.3 per cent); and not theory (specificity, uncertainty and knowing where and how to complain exchange frequency) can be invoked to

᭧ Henry Stewart Publications 1741-2447 (2003) Vol. 11, 1, 60–79 Database Marketing & Customer Strategy Management 71 Crie´

explain CCB. Does approaching the to understand better the complaint process distributor or manufacturer entail specific inordertocopewithitbetter.Firstofall, costs? Generally, CCB requires time and and within the framework of relationship effort thus generating a mixture of marketing, complaint management is a different types of costs, eg opportunity major strategic issue. On the one hand cost of the elapsed time, deliberation complaint management has a retention costs, transportation costs — these can be function in the sense that where a called CCB transaction costs. These costs customer satisfied with the treatment of are specific to the envisaged response his/her complaint gets a second-order type whether it is actual or not. They feeling of satisfaction his/her confidence cannot be paid off afterwards, at best with the company is strengthened. Thus they could be used as a learning stage in companies that respond to consumer order to reduce them during a later dissatisfaction and complaints with complaint. Uncertainty arises from any appropriate recovery strategies and transaction (ie complaint) and the satisfactory complaint resolution can turn consumer looks for information to dissatisfied consumers into satisfied ones, reduce this uncertainty to a bearable positively influencing repurchase rates (eg level. Finally, the complaint frequency Bearden and Oliver135). To decrease the has a direct influence on its organisation, effect of dissatisfaction and the incidence possibly becoming a ‘routine’, thus of further negative actions, companies reducing the associated costs. This theory need to show, at the least, that they are thus explains more frequent CCB when responsive to legitimate complaints. But, consumers have superior educational if problems are resolved poorly, they are level: they know their rights so the level only the beginning of a multitude of of uncertainty associated with the ‘hidden’ actions which do not come to complaint is reduced and there is, the attention of the business. So, proper therefore, a global decrease of the handling of customer complaints improves perceived costs of a complaint. repeat patronage intentions and reduces Nevertheless, as a general rule, the negative word of mouth.136 Finally, in majority of dissatisfied customers do not dealing with complaints, truly complain. Kolodinsky132 insists moreover marketing-oriented companies must on the assessment, by the consumer, of examine not only the costs of the remedy, the temporal cost of the choice of an but also the cost of not settling the appropriate response. Furthermore, as the complaint. search for a new product or supplier also The usual rationale is that complaints generates numerous costs, it is often the represent valuable feedback to companies case that the dissatisfied consumer refrains that allows them to take corrective from any action.133,134 action vis-a`-vis the defective product or service as regards either the critical incidents137 or adjustment of the offer to MANAGERIAL IMPLICATIONS FOR match customer expectations. HANDLING COMPLAINTS Both actions are of strategic nature: Businesses are, too often, completely the first is concerned with customer hopeless at dealing with complaints, relationship management and retention, although complaint management has the second with an equally long-term become an important issue for many strategy, ie continuous improvement of companies. Some elements of the various the product or service in order to fit theories mentioned above allow managers customer expectations.

72 Database Marketing & Customer Strategy Management Vol. 11, 1, 60–79 ᭧ Henry Stewart Publications 1741–2447 (2003) Consumers’ complaint behaviour

From an operational point of view, the by oral or written expression of the complaints handling process begins before trouble. For instance, complaint letters to the customer addresses his/her complaint Railtrack in the UK rose to an all time to the seller or manufacturer. All must be high in 2001, without the writers done in order that the various costs realistically expecting any immediate associated with this behaviour are benefit other than the ability to articulate reduced, so that complaints are their frustration. Complaint, especially encouraged, facilitated and even solicited voice, gives the customer an opportunity in order for companies to take corrective to ‘tell their side of the story’ which action. Kotler138 suggests that the best serves as a kind of reward for the thingaretailercandoistomakeiteasy customer.140 Furthermore, Levy and for a customer to complain. For example, We it z 141 argue that a salesperson’s Saint Maclou, a French willingness to listen can be an important nationally-advertised carpet manufacturer source of consumer dissatisfaction and and retailer, indicates on each bill the complaint intentions. A salesperson’s name of the person to contact if a willingness to listen has been described as problem arises and, if the trouble remains the degree of attentiveness a person unresolved, the name of a more shows.142 According to Palmroth,143 a empowered executive is given. Access to salesperson must ask questions until s/he the company thus has to be understands the full nature of the multichannel. The customer must be complaint without appearing to place assured that he/she will be listened to blame on the customer. These and that his/her problem will probably salespeople should be seen as trustworthy, be successfully resolved. Lastly, and friendly, expert, honest, helpful and according to justice theory, the consumer concerned. The third step is concerned must be conscious that the failure will be with the acknowledgment of the failure, corrected fairly, that is to say with if justified. (If not, it is necessary to impartiality, transparency, effectiveness explain why and, according to the and fairness. As the majority of attribution theory, to gently point out dissatisfied consumers leave the company themisuseoftheserviceorproduct.It without complaining, managers have to should also be noted that some overcome customers’ natural consumers may complain not out of disinclination to complain. dissatisfaction but in an effort to gain Thus this process is concerned with fraudulently from retailers or service recovery, that is to say, the manufacturers.) This is, however, related rectification of mistakes or compensation to the salesperson’s familiarity with the of customers. Service recovery is defined product and awareness of any possible as the response a provider makes to a problems with the merchandise in service failure;139 service failure usually question. Apologies are the next step and requires dissatisfaction on the part of the empowered contact employees must be customer. It begins with thanks for the able to offer immediate redress where approach by the customer: salespeople or possible or advice on the way to staffneedtolearntouse‘complaint proceed, always in order to reduce welcoming’ procedures. Then the customers’ costs and frustration. Indeed, complaintmustbelistenedto. of customers who register a complaint, Psychologically speaking it is important about 60 to 75 per cent will do business for the customer to cope with his/her with the provider again if their frustration through a kind of debriefing complaint has been resolved, and this

᭧ Henry Stewart Publications 1741-2447 (2003) Vol. 11, 1, 60–79 Database Marketing & Customer Strategy Management 73 Crie´

figure goes up to 95 per cent if the regulators on new, more efficient and customer feels that the complaint was transparent processes for complaints resolved quickly. Furthermore, providing management. The CCform project aims compensation is a common response to to develop an online, multilingual customer complaints. In addition to the complaint form and a best practice tangible benefits received, customers business process. With CCform, typically see the compensation as a consumers will be able to make symbolic expression of regret by the complaints in their own language, and provider.144 In a word, courteous and fast then the form will be translated into the treatment by front office personnel can companies’ preferred tongue. Note that enhance favourable post-complaint cultural norms appear to change the way responses145 and staff must persuade the people react to dissatisfaction and so the customer that all will be done to ensure response type. Consumers will be able to that the trouble does not recur. Other track the progress of their complaint, authors provide some rules of thumb. For and, if necessary, escalate their grievance example, Davidow146 presents a model to a dispute resolution service or framework that divides the organisational regulator. CCform can be used by any responses to complaint into six separate company doing business by e-commerce, dimensions: timeliness, facilitation, distance selling or local retail redress, apology, credibility and operations.148 Complainants may have attentiveness. Nevertheless, according to recourse to a third party and an Mitchell,147 a study shows that 51 per escalation in the process can result. In cent of his sample who had complained this sense, the complaint handling can about a service and 23 per cent about also be seen as a dispute prevention products were less than completely mechanism. satisfied with the responses they received. On the other hand, and from a The importance of regulatory customer relationship management point authorities in determining how of view, CCB is an important early complaints should be managed in a warning. Furthermore, Powers and marketing sense, and their active Bendall-Lyon149 have shown that the involvement in researching this area and number of complaints increased as a setting standards should also be noted. result of the introduction of a complaint Generally speaking the legal analysis management programme in an hospital assumes that it is important that context. Complaint management companies are involved in fixing programmes enable organisations to problems with consumers. But more receive complaint information in order to often, sector-based organisations are identify and accommodate dissatisfied proactive and promulgate codes of customers and identify common failure conduct or of deontology in order to points in order to improve service provide a conventional frame for a wide quality. Each complaint either by phone, range of business activities, including face to face, letter or e-mail, should be complaints. For instance, Consumer recorded in the database. The manager Complaint Form (CCform; coordinated should be able to link each product, by the Federation of European Direct customer and complaint together. For Marketing) is a European Commission example, a customer with an increasing Information Society Technology funded complaint rate may be in a leaving phase project to reach a consensus between and should be carefully monitored. business, consumers, academics and Indeed, and although customer

74 Database Marketing & Customer Strategy Management Vol. 11, 1, 60–79 ᭧ Henry Stewart Publications 1741–2447 (2003) Consumers’ complaint behaviour

relationship management aims to establish sphere of equity and the psychological and maintain ongoing customer sphere, notably represented by relationships by focusing on the specific attribution), supply a synthetic approach customer’s needs in order to deliver high by describing CCB in two stages: levels of customer satisfaction and initiation and modulation. The initiation company loyalty, one major aspect of phase is related to the dissatisfaction level customer relationship management is the which determines the opening of the effective handling of customer process. It is then followed by a search complaints. for attribution of the problem and by the perception of the inequitable character of the transaction engendering frustration or CONCLUSION AND FUTURE stress which the individual will try to RESEARCH minimise. It is during the evaluation of This paper allows CCB to be placed and the problem resolution strategies that defined within the larger framework of modulators, such as experience and responses to dissatisfaction and then attitude towards the complaint, suggests an integrating framework of personality of the individual and his/her diachronic nature. Until now research sensitivity to quality, will or will not into CCB has taken a deductive allow the process to evolve towards the approach, researchers trying to deduce its actual complaint. Other factors of this causes from contextual or individual type can be isolated, such as loyalty level elements without being really interested and information level, the degree of in the process taking place in a temporal nearness (commitment) in the space of variable duration. relationship with the supplier, the market The various works of literature studied structure (particularly the possibility of offer different explanations for CCB but choice alternatives) and finally, the few of them consider the sequence and hoped/expected utility of the complaint interaction of initiating or modulating with regard to the perceived costs as factors in a process. CCB is indeed well as the accessibility of the company essentially described in its immediate for CCB. If CCB is taken to be a nature, that is to say as an instantaneous process it becomes easy to link together event. Nevertheless, the nature and all the response types following an intensity of response to dissatisfaction episode of dissatisfaction and this certainly depend on the type of knowledge is helpful for complaints experience and on the responsible handling, eg in encouraging the customer product/service but they also involve to complain or in avoiding his leaving. two other actors (the supplier and the The TARP study150 indeed indicates that customer) in a diachronic framework. 90 per cent of dissatisfied consumers The variability of individual reactions, initiate no action and leave the product, notably revealed by the lack of a clear brand or company. typology of ‘complainers and non- So, the managerial implications arise complainers’, results from a different not only from contextual factors but also weighting of constitutive elements of the from the diachronic aspect of the process over time. phenomenon. Although initiators are The joining together and organisation onlyweaklyaccessibletoactionbythe of these elements, from which three manager, except by avoiding large areas can be isolated (the utilitarian dissatisfaction and by strengthening the sphere of the economists, the ethical perceived equity of transactions, some

᭧ Henry Stewart Publications 1741-2447 (2003) Vol. 11, 1, 60–79 Database Marketing & Customer Strategy Management 75 Crie´

modulators can be amended so as to lead that marketers can hope to increase the the dissatisfied customer to complain number of ‘complainers’. more frequently. Thus the company can contribute to the modification of References consumers’ attitudes towards CCB by: 1 Hirschman, A. O. (1970) ‘Exit, voice and loyalty: rendering more favourable the perception Responses to decline in firms, organizations and states’, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA. of previous experiences; restoring a 2 Day, R. and Landon, E. Jr. (1977) ‘To w a r d a feeling of equity after a complaint; theory of consumer complaining behavior’ in decreasing the costs, particularly the Woodside, Sheth and Bennett (eds) ‘Consumer and industrial buying behavior’, North Holland psychological ones; and finally, Publishing Co., Amsterdam, pp. 425–437. establishing interpersonal relationships 3 Richins, M. L. (1987) ‘A multivariate analysis of that reduce the attraction of alternatives. responses to dissatisfaction’, Journal of the Academy It is necessary to reward customers who of Marketing Science,Vol.15,No.4,pp.24–31. 4 Levesque, T. J. and McDougall, G. H. G. (1996) complain by including them in this step ‘Customer dissatisfaction: The relationship and by getting them used to this cultural between types of problems and customer change. response’, Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences,Vol.13,No.3,pp.264–276. It is necessary to insist on the urgency 5 Brown, S. and Swartz, T. (1984) ‘Consumer of a dissatisfaction communication to the medical complaint behavior: Determinants of and company and to shorten the response alternatives to malpractices litigation’, Journal of Public Policy and Marketing,Vol.3,pp.85–98. delay (free phone number, specific 6 Day,R.L.,Grabicke,K.,Schaetzle,T.and coupon, website, CCform...) in order to Staubach, F. (1981) ‘The hidden agenda of minimise the negative constituents of the consumer complaining’, Journal of Retailing,Vol. modulators. From a passive role of 57, No. 3, pp. 86–106. 7 Bearden, W. O. and Teel, J. E. (1983) ‘Selected complaint reception, the company has to determinants of consumer satisfaction and evolve towards a proactive stage in the complaint reports’, Journal of Marketing Research, genesis and the actual expression of Vol. 20, No. 1, pp. 21–28. 8 Barnes, J. and Kelloway, K. R. (1980) CCB. It is then necessary to gather ‘Consumerists: Complaining behavior and attitude information about dissatisfaction as toward social and consumer issues’, Advances in quickly as possible in order to divert a Consumer Research,Vol.7,pp.329–334. 9 Singh, J. (1988) ‘Consumer complaint intentions process which would otherwise probably and behavior: Definitional and taxonomical lead to the customer leaving. So, issues’, Journal of Marketing,Vol.52,No.2, complaints must be regarded more as a pp. 93–107. marketing tool than as a cost (better 10 Day, R. L. (1984) ‘Modeling choices among alternative responses to dissatisfaction’, Advances in service to the customer and customer Consumer Research, Vol. 11, pp. 496–499. retention); they constitute a fundamental 11 Day and Landon (1977) op. cit. element of relationship marketing. 12 Jacoby, J. and Jaccard, J. J. (1981) ‘The sources, meaning and validity of consumer complaining This synthesis should encourage the behavior; A psychological review’, Journal of number of research studies into the Retailing,Vol.57,No.3,pp.4–24. diachronic side of CCB, in the sense that 13 Day et al. (1981) op. cit. 14 Fornell, C. and Wernerfelt, B. (1987) ‘Defensive any dissatisfaction (of external attribution) marketing strategy by customer complaint requires that the consumer get in touch management: A theoretical analysis’, Journal of with the company. So, the relationship Marketing Research,Vol.24,No.4,pp.337–346. between dissatisfaction, complaint 15 Singh (1988) op. cit. 16 Day and Landon Jr. (1977) op. cit. intention and actual response deserve to 17 Day (1984) op. cit. be clarified in connection with time. It is 18 Richins, M. L. (1983) ‘Negative word of mouth also advisable to analyse more exactly by dissatisfied consumers: A pilot study’, Journal of Marketing,Vol.47,No.1,pp.68–78. consumers’ expectations of complaints. It 19 Hirschman (1970) op. Cit. is indeed by satisfying these expectations 20 Day and Landon Jr. (1977) op. cit.

76 Database Marketing & Customer Strategy Management Vol. 11, 1, 60–79 ᭧ Henry Stewart Publications 1741–2447 (2003) Consumers’ complaint behaviour

21 Mooradian, T. A. and Olver, J. M. (1997) ‘Ican’t 41 Gronhaug and Zaltman (1981) op. cit. get no satisfaction: The impact of personality and 42 Singh (1988) and (1990) op. cit. emotion on postpurchase processes’, Psychology 43 Keng, K. A., Richemond, D. and Han, S. (1995) and Marketing,Vol.14,No.4,pp.379–393. ‘Determinants of consumer complaint behaviour: 22 Kolodinsky, J. (1995) ‘Usefulness of economics in A study of Singapore consumers’, Journal of explaining consumer complaints’, The Journal of International Consumer Marketing,Vol.8,No.2,pp. Consumer Affairs,Vol.29,No.1,pp.29–54. 59–67. 23 Lovelock, C. H. (1996) ‘Services marketing’,3rd 44 Masson and Himes (1973) op. cit. ed., Prentice Hall, New Jersey, pp. 473–480. 45 Warland (1975) op. cit. 24 Day, R. (1980) ‘Research perspectives on 46 Singh (1988) and (1990) op. cit. consumer complaint behavior’, Lamb and Dunne 47 Weiser (1995) op. cit. (eds) ‘Theoretical developments in marketing’, 48 Pfaff and Blivice (1977) op. cit. AMA, Chicago IL, pp. 211–215. 49 Warland, R. H., Hermann, R. O. and Moore, D. 25 Shuptrine, K. and Wenglorz, G. (1980) E. (1984) ‘Consumer and community ‘Comprehensive identification of consumer’s involvement: An exploration of their theoretical marketplace problems and what they do about and empirical linkages’, Journal of Consumer Affairs, them’, Advances in Consumer Research,Vol.8, Vol. 18, No. 1, pp. 64–79.. pp. 687–692. 50 Singh (1988) and (1990) op. cit. 26 Gronhaug, K. and Zaltman, G. (1981) 51 Dart and Freeman (1994) op. cit. ‘Complainers and non-complainers revisited: 52 Weiser (1995) op. cit. Another look at the data’, Advances in Consumer 53 Dart and Freeman (1994) op. cit. Research,Vol.8,pp.83–87. 54 Singh (1988) and (1990) op. cit. 27 Bearden and Teel (1983) op. cit. 55 Weiser (1995) op. cit. 28 Masson, J. B. and Himes, S. H. (1973) ‘An 56 Kolodinsky (1995) op. cit. exploratory behavioral and socio-economic profile 57 Conlon, D. E. and Murray, N. M. (1996) of consumer action about a dissatisfaction with ‘Customer perceptions of corporate responses to selected household appliances’, Journal of Consumer product complaints: The role of explanations’, Affairs,Vol.7,No.1,pp.121–127. Academy of Management Journal,Vol.39,No.4, 29 Warland, R. H., Hermann, R. O. and Willis, J. pp. 1040–1056. (1975) ‘Dissatisfied consumers: Who gets upset 58 Stephens, N. and Gwinner, K. P. (1998) ‘Why and who takes action’, Journal of Consumer Affairs, don’t some people complain? A cognitive-emotive Vol. 9, No. 2, pp. 148–163. process model of consumer complaint behavior’, 30 Pfaff, M. and Blivice, S. (1977) ‘Socioeconomic Journal of The Academy of Marketing Science,Vol. correlates of consumer and citizen dissatisfaction 26, No. 3, 172–189. and activism’,inDayR.‘Consumer satisfaction, 59 Lazarus, R. S. (1966) ‘Psychological stress and the dissatisfaction and complaining behavior’, Indiana coping process’,McGrawHill,NewYork. University Press, Bloomington, pp. 115–123. 60 Kolodinsky (1995) op. cit. 31 Singh, J. (1990) ‘A typology of consumer 61 Day (1984) op. cit. dissatisfaction response styles’, Journal of Retailing, 62 Oliver, R. L. (1987) ‘An investigation of the Vol. 66, No. 1, pp. 57–98. interrelationship between consumer 32 Dart, J. and Freeman, K. (1994) ‘Dissatisfaction (dis)satisfaction and complaint reports’, Advances in response styles among clients of professional Consumer Research, Vol. 14, pp. 218–222. accounting firms’, Journal of Business Research,Vol. 63 Jacoby and Jaccard (1981) op. cit. 29, No. 1, pp. 75–82. 64 Westbrook, R. A. (1987) ‘Product/consumption 33 Weiser, C. (1995), ‘Customer retention: The based affective responses and postpurchase importance of the ‘‘Listening Organisation’’ ’, processes’, Journal of Marketing Research,Vol.24, Journal of Database Marketing,Vol.2,No.4,pp. No.3,pp.258–270. 344–358. 65 Ping, R. A. (1993) ‘The effects of satisfaction and 34 Hirschman (1970) op. cit. structural constraints on retailer exiting, voice, 35 Dart and Freeman (1994) op. cit. loyalty, opportunism and neglect’, Journal of 36 Weiser (1995) op. cit. Retailing,Vol.69,No.3,pp.320–352. 37 Etzel, M. and Siverman, B. (1981) ‘A managerial 66 These authors mention the possibility of perspective on directions for retail customer complaint by satisfied consumers, either to try to satisfaction research’, Journal of Retailing,Vol.57, obtain more from the company, or for fear of a No.3,pp.124–136. future breakdown or because of doubt in the 38 Shuptrine and Wenglorz, (1980) op. cit. performance of the product or because of 39 Bearden, W., Crockett, M. and Teel, J. (1980) ‘A propensity to complain. past model of consumer complaint behavior’,in 67 Singh, J. (1989) ‘Determinants of consumer’s Bagozzi,R.P.(ed.)‘Marketing in the 80’s: decision making to seek third party redress: An Changes and challenges’, AMA Proceedings, empirical study of dissatisfied patients’, The Chicago, IL, pp. 101–104. Journal of Consumer Affairs,Vol.23,No.2, 40 Day (1980) op. cit. pp. 329–363.

᭧ Henry Stewart Publications 1741-2447 (2003) Vol. 11, 1, 60–79 Database Marketing & Customer Strategy Management 77 Crie´

68 Oliver, R. L. (1980) ‘A cognitive model of the 88 Day (1984) op. cit. antecedents and consequences of satisfaction 89 Singh (1990) op. cit. decisions’, Journal of Marketing Research,Vol.17, 90Hansen,S.W.,Powers,T.andSwan,J.E. No.4,pp.460–469. (1997) ‘Modelling industrial buyer complaints: 69 Day et al. (1981) op. cit. Implications for satisfying and saving customers’, 70Grandbois,D.,Summers,J.O.andFrazier,G.L. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice,Vol,5, (1977) ‘Correlates of consumer expectation and No.4,pp.12–22. complaining behavior’,inDay,R.L.(ed.), 91 Kolodinsky (1995) op. cit. ‘Consumer satisfaction, dissatisfaction and 92 Hirschman (1970) op. cit. complaining behavior’, Indiana University Press, 93 Fornell and Didow (1980) op. cit. Bloomington, In. 94 Hirschman (1970) op. cit. 71 Richins (1987) op. cit. 95 Kolodinsky (1995) op. cit. 72 Maute, M. F. and Forrester, W. R. (1993) ‘The 96 Hirschman (1970) op. cit. structure and determinants of consumer complaint 97 Andreasen, A. R. and Best, A. (1977) intentions and behavior’, Journal of Economic ‘Consumers complain. Does business respond?’, Psychology,Vol.14,No.2,pp.219–247. Harvard Business Review,Vol.55,No.4,pp. 73 Singh, J. and Pandya, S. (1991) ‘Exploring the 93–101. effects of consumers’ dissatisfaction level on 98 Fornell and Didow (1980) op. cit. complaint behaviours’, European Journal of 99 Barksdale, H. C., Powell, T. E. and Hargrove, Marketing,Vol.25,No.9,pp.7–22. E. (1984) ‘Complaint voicing by industrial 74 Richins, M. (1982) ‘An investigation of buyers’, Industrial Marketing Management,Vol.13, consumer’s attitude toward complaining’, Advances No.2,pp.93–100. in Consumer Research,Vol.9,pp.502–606. 100 Weiser (1995) op. cit. 75 Richins, M. L. (1985) ‘Seeking redress for 101 Andreasen, A. R. (1985) ‘Consumer responses to consumer dissatisfaction: The role of attitude and dissatisfaction in loose monopolies’, Journal of situational factors’, Journal of Consumer Policy,Vol. Consumer Research,Vol.12,No.2,pp.135–141. 8,No.1,pp.29–37. 102 Maute and Forrester (1993) op. cit. 76 Singh (1989) op. cit. 103 Oster, S. (1980) ‘The determination of consumer 77 Valle, V. A. and Krishman, S. (1978) complaints’, Review of Economics and Statistics, ‘Dissatisfaction attributions and consumer Vol. 62, No. 4, pp. 603–609. complaint behavior’, Advances in Consumer 104 Kolodinsky (1995) op. cit. Research,Vol.6,pp.445–449. 105 Day et al. (1981) op. cit. 78Weiner,B.,Frieze,I.,Kukla,A.,Reed,L.and 106 Andreasen and Best (1977) op. cit. Rosenbaum, R. M. (1972) ‘Percieving the causes 107 Shuptrine and Wenglorz (1980) op. cit. of success and failure’, in Jones, E. E, et al.(eds) 108 Bearden, W. and Masson, J. (1984) ‘An ‘Attribution perceiving the causes of behavior’, investigation of influences on consumer General Learning Press, Morristown, NJ, complaint reports’, Advances in Consumer Research, pp. 95–120. Vol. 11, pp. 490–495. 79 Stephens and Gwinner (1998) op. cit. 109 Zeithaml, V. A. and Bitner, M. J. (1996) 80 Folkes, V. S. (1984) ‘Consumer reactions to ‘Services marketing’,McGrawHill,NewYork. product failure: An attributional approach’, 110 Day et al. (1981) op. cit. Journal of Consumer Research,Vol.10,No.1,pp. 111 Richins (1987) op. cit. 393–409. 112 Cornwell, B. T., Bligh, A. D. and Babakus, E. 81 Fornel, C. and Westbrook, R. A. (1979) ‘An (1991) ‘Complaint behavior of Mexican– exploratory study of assertiveness, aggressiveness, American consumers to a third-party agency’, and consumer complaining behavior’, Advances in The Journal of Consumer Affairs, Vol. 25, Summer, Consumer Research,Vol.6pp.105–110. pp. 1–18. 82 Mischel, W. (1971) ‘Introduction to personality’, 113 Webster, C. (1991) ‘Attitudes toward marketing Holt, Rinehart and Winston Inc., NY, quoted by practices: The effects of ethnic identification’, Fornell and Westbrook (1979). Journal of Applied Business Research,Vol.7,No.2, 83 Stephens and Gwinner (1998) op. cit. pp. 107–117. 84 Maute and Forrester (1993) op. cit. 114 Kolodinsky, J. (1993) ‘Complaints, redress and 85 Lapidus, R. S. and Pinkerton, L. (1995), subsequent purchases of medical services by ‘Customer complaint situations: An equity theory dissatisfied consumers’, Journal of Consumer Policy, perspective’, Psychology and Marketing,Vol.12, Vol. 16, No. 2, pp. 193–214. No.2,pp.105–118. 115 Farhangmehr, M. and Silva, M. (1995) ‘Strategic 86Blodgett,J.G.,Grandbois,D.H.andWalters,R. importance of consumer’s complaints: An G. (1993) ‘The effect of perceived justice on empirical study’, Marketing Today and for the complainant’s negative word of mouth behavior 21th Century Proceedings of the 24th EMAC and repatronage intentions’, Journal of Retailing, Conference; pp. 1595–1604. Vol, 69, No. 4, pp. 399–426. 116 Gronhaug, K. (1977) ‘Exploring consumer 87 Jacoby and Jaccard (1981) op. cit. complaining behaviour: A model and some

78 Database Marketing & Customer Strategy Management Vol. 11, 1, 60–79 ᭧ Henry Stewart Publications 1741–2447 (2003) Consumers’ complaint behaviour

empirical results’, Advances in Consumer Research, (TARP) (1986) ‘Consumer complaint handling Vol. 4, pp. 159–165. in America: An update study, Parts I and II’, 117 Morganosky, M. A. and Buckley, H. M. (1987) TARP and US Ofﬁce of Consumer Affairs, ‘Complaint behavior: Analysis by demographics, Washington DC’, April. lifestyle and consumer values’, Advances in 134 Fornell and Wernerfelt (1987) op. cit. Consumer Research, Vol. 14, pp. 223–226. 135 Bearden and Oliver (1985) op. cit. 118 Anderson, E. W. and Sullivan, M. W. (1993) 136 Blodgett, Grandbois and Walters (1993) op. cit. ‘The antecedents and consequences of customer 137 Carlzon, J. (1988) ‘Moments of truth’,Harper& satisfaction for ﬁrms’, Marketing Science,Vol.12, Row, NY. No. 2, pp. 125-143 138 Kotler, P. (1997) ‘Marketing management: 119 Gronhaug and Zaltman (1981) op. cit. Analysis, planning, implementation, and control’, 120 Warland, Hermann and Willis (1975) op. cit. Prentice-Hall, Inc, Upper Saddle River, NJ. 121 Jacoby and Jaccard (1981) op. cit. 139 Kelley, S. W. and Davis, M. A. (1994) 122 Bearden, W. O. and Oliver, R. (1985) ‘The role ‘Antecedents to customer expectations for of public and private complaining in satisfaction service recovery’, Academy of Marketing Science in problem resolution’, Journal of Consumer Journal,Vol.22,No.1,pp.52–62. Affairs,Vol.19,No.2,pp.222–240. 140 Alexander, E. C. (2002) ‘Consumer reactions to 123 Singh (1990) op. cit. unethical service recovery’, Journal of Business 124 Ibid. Ethics,Vol.36,No.3,pp.223–237. 125 Bearden, W., Crockett, M. and Teel, J. (1980) 141 Levy, M. and Weitz, B. A. (1998) ‘Retailing ‘A past model of consumer complaint behavior’, management, Irwin McGraw Hill, Boston, MA. Bagozzi,R.P.(ed.)‘Marketing in the 80’s: 142 Palmroth, B. (1988) ‘Welcome complaints’, Changes and challenges’, Proceedings AMA, American Salesman,3–5July. Chicago IL, pp. 101–104. 143 Ibid. 126 Laforge, M. C. (1989) ‘Learned helplessness as 144 Conlon and Murray (1996) op. cit. an explanation of elderly consumer complaint 145 Blodgett, J. G., Hill, D. J. and Tax, S. S. (1997) behavior’, Journal of Business Ethics,Vol.8,No. ‘The effects of distributive, procedural, and 5, pp. 359–366. interactional justice on postcomplaint behaviour’, 127 Landon, E. L. (1977) ‘A model of consumer Journal of Retailing,Vol.73,No.2,pp.185–210. complaint behavior’, Indiana University Press, 146 Davidow, M. (2003) ‘Organizational responses to Bloomington, pp. 31–35. customer complaints: What works and what 128 Fornell and Didow (1980) op. cit. doesn’t’, Journal of Service Research,Vol.5,No.3. 129 Hirschman (1970) op. cit. 147 Mitchell, V. W. (1993) ‘Handling consumer 130 Gronhaug, K. and Gilly, M. C. (1991) ‘A complaint information: Why and how?’, transaction cost approach to consumer Management Decision, Vol. 31, No. 3, pp. 21-28. dissatisfaction and complaint actions’, Journal of 148 CCForm website at http://www.ccform.org Economic Psychology,Vol.12,No.1,pp.165–183. 149 Powers, T. L. and Bendall-Lyon, D. (2002) ‘Using 131 Williamson, O. E. (1979) ‘Transaction cost complaint behaviour to improve quality through economics: The governance of contractual the structure and process of service delivery’, relations’, Journal of Law and Economics,Vol.22, Journal of Consumer Satisfaction, Dissatisfaction and No.2,pp.3–61. Complaining Behavior,Vol.15,pp.13–21. 132 Kolodinsky (1995) op. cit. 150 Technical Assistance Research Program Institute 133 Technical Assistance Research Program Institute (TARP) (1986) op. cit.

᭧ Henry Stewart Publications 1741-2447 (2003) Vol. 11, 1, 60–79 Database Marketing & Customer Strategy Management 79