41784502

7/28/2019 41784502

1/13

The right to be heard and to be understood: a conceptual

framework for consumer protection in emerging economies

Sun Donoghue and Helena M. de Klerk

Department of Consumer Science, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa

Keywords

Consumer complaint behaviour,

consumerism, redress environment.

Correspondence

Sun Donoghue, Department of Consumer

Science (Room 3-14), University of Pretoria,

Pretoria, South Africa.

E-mail: [email protected]

doi: 10.1111/j.1470-6431.2009.00773.x

Abstract

In many emerging economies and developing countries, comprising consumers from

different cultures and with varying degrees of sophistication (knowledge and skill) con-

cerning consumer protection, the promotion of consumers rights to develop a consumer-

oriented culture remains a very big challenge. One way of protecting the consumer,

especially the consumer that has not been fully socialized to execute informed decisions

when purchasing expensive durables, is by establishing a redress environment that would

ensure fair redress as well as an understanding and appreciation of the consumer. Manu-facturers and retailers are often not aware of the performance failures that consumers

experience concerning their products because many people do not communicate their

dissatisfactions to them. However, unless and until manufacturers and retailers fully com-

prehend their customers complaint behaviour, their reasons for engaging in specific

complaint behaviour and the reasoning (cognitive processes) and emotional processes

behind their behaviour, they will not recognize the link between complaint handling and

customer loyalty and profits.

The purpose of this paper was to develop a theoretical conceptual framework that would

enable consumer scientists, consumer consultants, consumer behaviour researchers and

those with the responsibility of handling consumer complaints to explore and understand

consumer complaint behaviour in its entirety. We argue that, to be able to establish and

manage a redress environment that is characterized by an understanding of the specific

consumer as well as by effective complaint behaviour handling, it is of the utmost impor-

tance that the manufacturer, retailer, consumer consultant and all those that work with

consumers complaints understand the entire complaint process, including the underlying

cognitive and emotional processes as well as the consumers post-complaint perception of

justice and his/her satisfaction with the complaint handling. It is also important to under-

stand the role that consumer-, product- and redress environment-related variables play in

consumer complaint behaviour. The consumer who blames the retailer for the problem and

who probably feels angry about the situation and decides to complain will expect redress.

From a consumers viewpoint, complaint-related justice is, however, not only a matter of

economic calculus but also a matter of procedure and interaction. We therefore argue for a

holistic approach where consumer complaint behaviour is addressed in its entirety. Prac-

tical suggestions that could enhance customer satisfaction are given for manufacturers,

retailers and those who deal with consumers complaints.

Introduction

Social and economic reforms in transitional and emerging econo-

mies have led to rapid increases in consumer income and a demand

for various products. For example, the new political dispensations

that came into being in many African countries (among which

South Africa) have led to an increase in the consumption of goods

as a way of displaying increased self-worth and newly acquired

wealth, especially among those from previously disadvantaged

backgrounds. Many of these developing countries comprise con-

sumers from different cultural backgrounds who have not been

properly socialized concerning the consumption of a variety of

new and in many cases expensive household durables and the

appropriate complaint behaviour in cases where they are not sat-

isfied with their purchases. In many of these countries, with con-

sumers with varying degrees of sophistication (knowledge and

skill) concerning consumer protection, the promotion of consum-

ers rights to develop a consumer-oriented culture remains a very

International Journal of Consumer Studies ISSN 1470-6423

International Journal of Consumer Studies 33 (2009) 456467

Journal compilation 2009 Blackwell Publishing Ltd

456
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]

7/28/2019 41784502

2/13

big challenge. Internationally, there is immense support for con-

sumer protection; however, the notion exists that consumer pro-

tection can only exist in first-world (developed) countries with

ample fiscal resources to properly act in the interest of consumers.

This conception leaves consumers in emerging and transitional

economies in a dilemma, as they do not live in an ideal world with

sufficient resources to educate consumers on their rights.

There is a proliferation of literature on consumer socialization(Moschis, 1987; Carlson et al., 1994; Ward in McGregor, 1999),

which is a broad term for the whole process by which people learn

the skills, knowledge and attitudes relevant to their functioning as

consumers in the marketplace. One of the roles for which people

are socialized is that of consumption, including not only the pur-

chasing and usage of goods and services but also post-purchase

reactions such as complaining in the case of dissatisfaction with

products or services. With regard to transitional and developing

countries, McGregor (1999) and Maheswaran and Shavitt (2000)

point to the importance of not only consumer socialization but also

consumer acculturation, where people from different backgrounds

and cultures have to learn and accept the norms, behaviour and

standards of a totally different culture and have to function in a

marketing environment that does not necessarily understand andappreciate the values, norms and behaviours of new consumer

groups. This can lead to a lack of consumer protection. One way of

protecting the consumer, especially the consumer that has not been

fully socialized, to execute informed decisions when purchasing

expensive durables is by establishing a redress environment that

would ensure fair redress as well as an understanding and appre-

ciation for the consumer.

Manufacturers and retailers are often not aware of the perfor-

mance failures that consumers experience concerning their prod-

ucts, as many people do not communicate their dissatisfactions to

them. However, unless and until manufacturers and retailers fully

comprehend their customers complaint behaviour, their reasons

for engaging in specific complaint behaviour and the reasoning(cognitive processes) and emotional processes behind their behav-

iour, they will not recognize the link between complaint handling

and customer loyalty and profits (Goodman, 2006; Donoghue,

2008). Loyal customers are increasingly regarded as the backbone

of any business because it is less expensive to retain existing

customers than to attain new ones (Terblanche and Boshoff, 2001;

Kim et al., 2003). Retailers can control their redress policies and

their handling of customer complaints to improve their service

quality and their customers in-store shopping experience, which

in turn will strengthen customer loyalty (Terblanche and Boshoff,

2001, 2003; Goodman, 2006). By addressing complaints about

dissatisfactory or faulty products, manufacturers also get the

opportunity to correct product problems, improve the quality of

existing merchandise and identify new consumer needs (Cri,2003; Bodey and Grace, 2006).

From a consumerism point of view, manufacturers and retailers

should therefore encourage consumers to complain to them about

product failures and should at the same time recognize that they

are legally responsible for the protection of their customers rights

in this context, specifically the right to be heard and to be

understood (Cri, 2003; Rousseau, 2003a). We argue that it is

not only about complaint handling but, especially in the case of

new and emerging consumer communities, about understanding

from the consumers point of view, the entire purchasing process,

including consumers expectations about product performance,

the dissatisfaction with the product performance, the decision to

complain and the accompanying reasoning and emotions. Such an

approach will enable the company to establish a redress environ-

ment that will respect the consumers right, not only to be heard

but also to be understood, and will most probably enable the

company or retailer to retain loyal customers, despite inevitable

problems with product failures.The purpose of this paper is to develop a theoretical conceptual

framework that will enable consumer scientists, consumer consult-

ants, consumer behaviour researchers and those with the respon-

sibility to handle consumer complaints to explore and understand

complaint behaviour in its entirety.

An explanation of consumercomplaint behaviour

To be able to establish and manage a redress environment that is

characterized by a comprehension of the specific consumer as well

as of effective complaint behaviour handling, it is of the utmost

importance that manufacturers, retailers, consumer consultants

and everybody working with consumers complaints understandthe entire complaint process, including the underlying cognitive

and emotional processes as well as consumers post-complaint

perception of justice and their satisfaction with complaint han-

dling procedures.

Cognitive and emotional processes underlying

consumer complaint behaviour

Consumer behaviour researchers agree that prior to purchasing

and consuming products, consumers form expectations regarding

the performance of such products in a particular use situation. In

addition, they believe that after or while using the product, con-

sumers evaluate its perceived performance in terms of their initialexpectations regarding the performance of the product. Consum-

ers evaluation of the perceived discrepancy between their prior

expectations and the actual performance of the product as per-

ceived after its consumption is generally referred to as the discon-

firmation of exception paradigm in the academic community

(Giese and Cote, 2000; Tronvoll, 2007). The duration of the con-

sumption evaluation process is, however, dependent on the type of

product (Broadbridge and Marshall, 1995). For example, consum-

ers can decide immediately whether they are happy or unhappy

with inexpensive and quickly consumed products such as perish-

able food items. In contrast, items that are used over longer periods

beyond the immediate post-purchase stage, such as durable prod-

ucts, take longer to evaluate. When the products performance

does not meet the consumers expectations (i.e. when a perfor-mance failure occurs or when the product performs poorly), nega-

tive disconfirmation occurs, leading to feelings of dissatisfaction

(Steward in Ndubisi and Ling, 2006).

Feelings of dissatisfaction are mediated by attributional reason-

ing (i.e. the cognitive process of wanting to find out why a negative

outcome or event occurred). Consumers could attribute the prod-

ucts failure to themselves (internal locus) or to the manufacturer,

retailer or some outside agent in the environment or situation or in

the product itself (external locus). The outcome of the purchase-

use situation could also be attributed to something temporary

S. Donoghue and H.M. de Klerk The right to be heard and to be understood



457

7/28/2019 41784502

3/13

(unstable) or something that is likely to occur each time the

product is purchased or used (stable) (Weiner, 2000). When

product failure is stable, people would probably expect the product

to fail if they purchase the same product again in the future.

Conversely, when product failure is caused by unstable reasons,

consumers would probably be less certain of future product failure

and would therefore purchase or use the same product again

(Folkes, 1984; Weiner, 2000). Additionally, both the consumer andother parties such as the manufacturer or retailer can either have

volitional control over an outcome or be under certain uncontrol-

lable constraints. Consumers perceptions of attributions (causes

for product failure) in terms of the locus, stability and controlla-

bility dimensions generate differentiated affective reactions. For

example, when retailers are thought to have control over the cause

of product failure (i.e. when the individual thinks that the retailer

could have prevented the product failure), consumers feel angry

and desire revenge more than when they are believed to lack

control (Folkes, 1984; Swanson and Kelley, 2001). Finally, the

affective reactions and expectations for future product failure

are thought to determine consumers behaviour (Weiner, 1986;

Laufer, 2002).

However, it should be noted that what people believe to be thecauses for product failure are sometimes far removed from the

truth. For example, some customers might unintentionally prefer

to attribute bad outcomes (in this case, product failure) to external

factors (manufacturers) rather than to their own wrongdoing. The

latter attribution fallacy is better known as self-serving attribu-

tional bias (Frsterling, 2001).

Conceptualizing consumer complaint

behaviour

One of the most direct and meaningful ways that consumers can

express their dissatisfaction about products to manufacturers and

retailers is to complain. Simply put, a complaint is a statementabout expectations that have not been met (Barlow and Mller,

1996). Complaint behaviour should, however, not only be thought

of as a direct or formal expression of dissatisfaction directed at

manufacturers and retailers (second parties) or to third parties

(i.e. a public consumer protection agency, voluntary organization,

ombudsman or court) (Singh, 1988; Halstead and Drge, 1991).

Consumers may also communicate their dissatisfaction about

products in much more indirect/hidden ways such as less favour-

able purchase attitudes, lower or non-existent purchase intentions,

negative word-of-mouth, changes in shopping behaviour such as

brand or product switching and retailer boycotts all of which are

detrimental to the retailer or manufacturers business (Day et al.,

1981; Goodwin and Spiggle, 1989). Studies show that consumers

will typically tell 810 people about dissatisfactory products toobtain emotional support (i.e. to vent their anger and to gain social

validation of their negative feelings) (Sanes, 1993; Halstead, 2002;

Donoghue, 2008). Consequently, far larger numbers of unknown

dissatisfied consumers respond in covert ways that never come to

the retailer or manufacturers attention. Furthermore, numerous

studies have indeed documented that a common response to con-

sumer dissatisfaction is to do nothing (never complain to the

retailer, manufacturer or a third party). However, non-behavioural

responses should be considered legitimate forms of consumer

complaining, despite the passive nature thereof (Singh, 1988;

Halstead and Drge, 1991). The inclusion of non-behavioural

responses as forms of consumer complaining appears not only to

be justified but also necessary to comprehend the process under-

lying the consumer complaint behaviour response (Singh, 1988;

Cri, 2003).

Bearing the above reasoning in mind, three major options are

available to consumers who are dissatisfied with their purchase:

private action and/or public action or no action. As such, consum-ers may engage in private actions (e.g. switching brands or retail-

ers, boycotting the type of product or warning family and friends)

and/or engage in public action such as seeking redress (i.e. a

refund, an exchange or free repairs and replacement of defective

parts depending on the nature of the product and particular

circumstances) directly from the retailer or manufacturer, com-

plaining to the retailer or manufacturer, a public consumer protec-

tion agency, a voluntary organization or the media, or taking legal

action against the retailer or manufacturer (Day and Landon, 1977;

Broadbridge and Marshall, 1995; Phau and Sari, 2004). Obvi-

ously, combinations of private and public actions may occur.

Alternatively, consumers may refrain from taking action by

rationalizing and forgetting about the product failure (Cri, 2003).

Once dissatisfaction occurs, consumers may therefore engagein behavioural and non-behavioural responses to resolve it (Day

and Landon, 1977; Singh, 1988; Broadbridge and Marshall, 1995).

Consumer responses to dissatisfaction are therefore generally

referred to as consumer complaint behaviour (Singh, 1988;

Maute and Forrester, 1993; Mattsson et al., 2004).

It is clear that it is of the utmost importance for the consumer

scientist, consumer consultant and those who are responsible for

managing the redress environment to understand the relations

between consumers causal ascriptions, emotions and complaint

behaviour. Lazarus and Lazarus (1994) define emotions as

complex reactions that engage both our minds and our bodies a

personal life drama, which has to do with the fate of our goals

in a particular encounter and our beliefs about ourselves and theworld we live in. Cognitive emotion theory assumes that emo-

tions are guided by construal or appraisal of the situation (Arnold,

1960; Lazarus, 1966; Ellis, 1975). How we think thus influences

how we feel and, in the end, also influences the strategies that we

choose to handle the situation. The complaint behaviour that the

consumer decides on should therefore be seen as a coping strategy

that the consumer has chosen in order to handle the situation as

well as his/her emotions. The consumer, who blames the retailer

for the problem that he/she experiences and who expects the

retailer to control the situation, would most probably feel angry or

even very angry when more expensive durables are involved.

Weiner (1986) notes that anger involves a normative judgement,

an attribution of blame. Lazarus and Lazarus (1994) note that the

biggest problem with anger is what to do about the situation thatprovoked the emotion. The first impulse is usually to cope with the

damage to our ego, to retaliate by attacking the one whom we

blame for the problem (voicing the anger and complaining to the

retailer or manufacturer) or to inhibit its expression as aggression.

However, to inhibit the expression of anger does not eliminate it

as an authentic emotional state. The anger remains as long as the

problem has not been solved. The consumer who blames the

retailer or manufacturer for the problem and who decides not

to seek redress from the retailer will therefore remain angry

and will, in addition, most probably experience aggression. The

The right to be heard and to be understood S. Donoghue and H.M. de Klerk



458

7/28/2019 41784502

4/13

problem will not be solved; however, the need to cope with the

emotion remains. The only way out for the frustrated consumer is

to choose another emotion-focused coping strategy such as telling

friends or boycotting the retailer or manufacturer both devastat-

ing for the specific retailer and manufacturer.

Factors influencing consumer

complaint behaviour

The complaining behaviour of consumers is not simply a matter of

perceived dissatisfaction with a product or service. Other factors

such as consumer-related variables, product-specific variables

and redress environment variables need to be examined to study

consumers complaint behaviour (Halstead and Drge, 1991;

Broadbridge and Marshall, 1995; Stephens and Gwinner, 1998;

Tronvoll, 2007). These factors relate to why consumers engage in

specific complaint actions and are therefore important to bear

in mind when researching or trying to understand the specific be-

havioural outcomes chosen. Consumers reasons for specific com-

plaint actions suggest specific problematic areas that retailers,

manufacturers and marketers can improve on by making strategic

and tactical decisions (Donoghue, 2008).

Consumer-related variables

Consumer-related variables refer to characteristics that are asso-

ciated with or determined primarily by consumers (i.e. individual

factors). Consumer characteristics that have been proposed as

antecedents to complaint behaviour include, among other things,

the followings: demographics (Ndubisi and Ling, 2006; Tronvoll,

2007), personality factors (Sharma and Marshall, 2005; Bodey and

Grace, 2006), attitudes (Kim et al., 2003; Velzquez et al., 2006),

personal values (Stephens and Gwinner, 1998; Liu and McClure,

2001), culture (Au et al., 2001; Blodgett et al., 2006), knowledge

and experience as consumers (Broadbridge and Marshall, 1995)and causal attributions for product failure (Weiner, 2000; Laufer,

2002).

Results have been fairly inconsistent with regard to the role of

demographic variables as a determinant in consumer complaining.

Whereas some researchers have suggested that complainers tend

to hold professional jobs, earn higher incomes, are well educated

and are younger than non-complainers, other researchers,

however, dispute this and propose that individuals who are poor or

low in education and the elderly do not necessarily react more

passively to perceived dissatisfaction (Broadbridge and Marshall,

1995; Cri, 2003; Phau and Sari, 2004; Ndubisi and Ling, 2006;

Tronvoll, 2007). Donoghue (2008) found that no significant dif-

ferences existed concerning the demographic profile (i.e. gender,

age, highest level of education, monthly household income,culture) of complainers vs. non-complainers. Broadbridge and

Marshalls (1995) survey also could not determine a profile for

complainers vs. non-complainers. Both these studies researched

consumers complaint behaviour concerning dissatisfactory

household appliances.

In addition, Donoghues (2008) research found no significant

relationships between gender, age and level of education on the

one hand, and the different types of complaint action (private and

public action) on the other. Concerning the relationships between

level of income and private and public complaint actions

respectively, Donoghue (2008) found no significant relationships

between level of income and telling friends, family and/or

acquaintances about the bad experience (private action) and con-

tacting the retailer/manufacturer to obtain redress (repairs/a

replacement/a refund) (public action) and contacting a repair

service other than that supplied by the retailer or manufacturer

(public action) respectively. However, her study, which was done

in an African developing country, showed that consumers fromthe lower income groups were significantly more inclined to stop

supporting retailers (private action) and to contact retailers/

manufacturers to complain for reasons other than seeking redress

(public action), compared with consumers from upscale income

groups contradicting previous research findings which indicated

that complainers tend to be the most financially successful

segments in the marketplace (Singh, 1990). Donoghues (2008)

findings may be explained by the fact that consumers in lower

socio-economic groups might consider complaining worth the

trouble as they are struggling more to make ends meet on their

hard-earned money, compared with higher income earners.

Cross-cultural research has shown that collectivists tend not to

express their emotions outwardly, and if negative emotions are

expressed, they are likely to be discussed in intimate social set-tings (Markus & Kitayama in Liu and McClure, 2001). Liu and

McClures (2001) study empirically confirmed that when dissat-

isfied, consumers in a collectivistic culture (South Korean con-

sumers) are less likely to complain publicly but are more likely to

engage in private behaviour than those in an individualist culture

(US consumers). In Donoghues (2008) study, the black consum-

ers (traditionally viewed as a collectivistic culture) did not engage

in negative word-of-mouth significantly more than the Caucasian

consumers (traditionally viewed as an individualistic culture), as

suggested by cross-cultural theory. However, a significantly larger

proportion of black respondents decided to use another brand

name and stopped supporting the retailer, confirming previous

studies in this respect (Liu and McClure, 2001). Black respondentswere also more inclined to complain to retailers and manufacturers

to obtain redress and to complain for other reasons than obtaining

redress compared with the Caucasian respondents, implying that

black respondents were much more actively involved in their com-

plaint behaviour concerning major electrical household appliances

than Caucasian respondents. This contradiction could be partly

explained in terms of the different value orientations guiding the

behaviour of black and Caucasian cultures. These days, most of

the South African black people subscribe to a mixture of African

and Western values while most of the South African Caucasian

people subscribe to Western values (Mbigi & Maree in Rousseau,

2003b). Thus, in addition to the black respondents collective will

(yearning for societal supportiveness and cohesion), they may be

increasingly adopting Western (individualistic) values and maytherefore tend to exhibit higher levels of individual assertiveness

and confidence.

Consumers personality traits and psychological characteristics

also play an important role in complaining behaviour. Consumers

differ in self-confidence and in their degree of aggressiveness or

submissiveness. Complainers have been found to be more asser-

tive, self-confident and in personal control of their life experiences

(internal control) and overall can be described as Type-A person-

alities, relative to non-complainers who are said to be unassertive,

to lack self-esteem and overall exhibit a Type-B personality (Sheth




459

7/28/2019 41784502

5/13

et al., 1999; Bodey and Grace, 2006). However, it should be

pointed out that researchers have found that underlying personality

traits provide very little explanatory power in explaining differ-

ences in consumer complaining behaviour (Richins, 1987;

Blodgett and Granbois, 1992; Stephens and Gwinner, 1998).

Several studies support the role of attitudes towards complain-

ing as direct positive antecedents of either complaining intentions

or complaining behaviour (Richins, 1982; Halstead and Drge,1991). Consumers who have a favourable attitude towards com-

plaining will be more likely to complain to those at fault and will

be more likely to seek redress from the retailer (Singh, 1990;

Blodgett and Granbois, 1992; Kincade et al., 1998; Velzquez

et al., 2006). Similarly, findings also suggest that a negative atti-

tude towards complaining may prohibit non-complainers from

taking complaint action (Bodey and Grace, 2006). Consumers

attitudes towards business, government, consumer organizations

and complaining have been studied in order to predict complaining

behaviour, but the results have been mixed (Halstead and Drge,

1991).

Singh (1990) found that prior experiences provide some of

the descriptors for predicting redress behaviour, specifically com-

plaint behaviour. In general, complainers tend to have more priorexperience of complaining compared with non-complainers.

Knowledge of unfair practices, consumer rights and where and

how to make complaints has been found to co-vary positively with

complaining behaviour (Singh, 1990). The more knowledgeable

consumer is less likely to have an unsatisfactory experience and

is more likely to be able to resolve it on his/her own or to obtain

redress with relatively little friction (Day and Landon, 1977). In

addition, those consumers who have experienced prior complaints

may determine how a company might respond to voiced com-

plaints and the associated costs and benefits (Kim et al., 2003).

The less knowledgeable and more inexperienced consumer will

be less able to judge product performance and evaluate the goods

and services that he/she uses. In addition, such a consumer willbe unfamiliar with procedures for seeking redress and registering

complaints (Barnes and Kelloway, 1980).

The role of attributional processing in consumer complaint

behaviour has been studied by numerous researchers (Weiner,

2000; Au et al., 2001; Laufer, 2002). To lead to consumer com-

plaint behaviour, the consumer has to identify the party respon-

sible for his/her dissatisfaction during a given consumption

episode (Cri, 2003). In Donoghues (2008) study, the respon-

dents mainly attributed the cause for product failure to factors

external to themselves such as the manufacturers wrongdoing

compared with human error and other reasons; however, they

were uncertain about whether their products would fail if they

were to purchase the same products in the future and about

whether retailers and manufacturers really have control overproduct failures. The interplay between the locus and controlla-

bility dimensions might have augmented respondents perception

of blame for the product failure and their subsequent complaint

behaviour. Anger was a significant predictor of negative word-of-

mouth behaviour. Those respondents who experienced higher

levels of anger were more likely to take action as opposed to no

action, switch brand names and stop supporting retailers (private

action) and to contact the retailer/manufacturer to complain for

other reasons than seeking redress, compared with those with

lower levels of anger.

Product-specific variables

Product-specific variables have been shown to be factors in pre-

dicting post-purchase behaviour of some products and consumer

services (Kincade et al., 1998). Product-specific variables related

to complaint behaviour include: the nature or type of product

(product category), cost of the product (Kincade et al., 1998;

Stephens and Gwinner, 1998), durability (Day and Landon, 1977,p. 434; Kincade et al., 1998), importance of the product to the

consumer (Stephens and Gwinner, 1998; Sheth et al., 1999,

p. 550), dissatisfaction with the product (Goodwin and Spiggle,

1989) and severity of the dissatisfaction or problems caused by the

dissatisfaction (Richins, 1987; Goodwin and Spiggle, 1989; Dono-

ghue, 2008).

It is generally accepted in consumer complaint behaviour theory

that highly priced, complex products (high in perceived risk) with

a relatively long life expectancy generate a higher incidence of

public complaints (Day and Landon, 1977; Broadbridge and

Marshall, 1995). More attempts to seek redress were noted in

studies of durable goods and services than for non-durable items

(Denier in Broadbridge and Marshall, 1995; Kincade et al., 1998).

Redress for a durable product may be considered worth it incontrast to a return trip to complain about a product with a short

life expectancy (Kincade et al., 1998).

Some dissatisfaction is relatively minor and may not justify the

effort to make a complaint (Maute and Forrester, 1993). However,

some, such as complete product breakdown or safety hazards of a

defective product, are more serious and thus more likely to result

in complaint action (Barnes and Kelloway, 1980). Donoghues

(2008) study showed that consumers who perceived the perfor-

mance failure of their products as very severe to extremely severe

were more likely to use another brand name and to stop supporting

the retailer than respondents who varied between not severe to

somewhat severe. In contrast, for all other complaint actions, the

level of severity did not impact action. This may help to explainconsumers general passivity concerning engaging in public com-

plaint action (especially formal complaint behaviour).

Redress environment variables

Redress environment variables refer to factors that are controlled

or primarily influenced by retailers (Halstead and Drge, 1991;

Dolinsky, 1994; Terblanche and Boshoff, 2001, 2003). Factors in

the redress environment that affect consumer complaint behaviour

include perceptions of the retailers responsiveness to customer

complaints (i.e. the retailers willingness to provide a remedy for

the dissatisfaction should a consumer complain) and the con-

sumers perceived trouble (inconvenience) involved in making a

complaint (Maute and Forrester, 1993; Huppertz, 2003). Othervariables subsumed under the latter include the psychological cost

of complaining, time lost (Dolinsky, 1994) and the monetary cost

of complaining (Richins, 1982).

Perceived fairness/justice (customers perception of the fair-

ness of the action) will largely determine whether that customer

will engage in consumer complaint behaviour (Blodgett and

Granbois, 1992; Sheth et al., 1999, p. 551; Davido, 2003; Kau and

Loh, 2006). Perceived fairness/justice is a collective term which

refers to the individual constructs of procedural fairness, distribu-

tive fairness and interactional fairness. Complaint management




460

7/28/2019 41784502

6/13

therefore entails much more than just refunding unhappy consum-

ers. By the application of professional complaint management,

complaint satisfaction can be achieved which can lead to positive

attitude changes, positive word-of-mouth and increased readiness

to buy from the same supplier. Consumers complaints stem from

a perceived injustice and when they decide to complain they

expect the company to offer a recovery. It not only involves the

consumers cognitive reasoning of who to blame for the injusticebut also involves strong accompanying emotions called justice-

related emotions. From a consumers viewpoint, complaint-related

justice is therefore more than a matter of economic calculus in

unbalanced exchanges. It is, according to Parkinson (1996,

p. 673), also about the meaning of the self in a situation and

therefore about coping with whatever threatens the experience of a

positive self and the feeling of control.

Previous research has shown that economic calculus and emo-

tions are intimately intertwined (Scher and Heise, 1993). From a

social justice and consumer point of view, justice is articulated on

three dimensions, namely, distributive (resource allocation and

outcome of exchange), procedural (the procedures used to reach

the outcome) and interactional (the communication process). To

ensure customer satisfaction and positive emotional and behav-ioural responses to perceived justice in a service recovery context,

the redress environment should therefore address all three dimen-

sions effectively (Berry and Parasuraman, 1994; Blodgett et al.,

1997; Chebat and Slusarczyk, 2005). Researchers such as Bagozzi

et al. (1999) and Schoefer and Diamantopoulos (2008) underline

the importance of addressing consumers emotions during service

recovery encounters, while Chebat and Slusarczyk (2005) point to

the importance of the mediating effects of emotions on the con-

sumers actual behavioural response (i.e. exit vs. loyalty) to per-

ceived justice in an actual setting.

Consumers are more likely to voice their complaints when there

is a more positive perception of the retailers responsiveness to

consumer complaints. When consumers doubt that retailers willrespond to complaints, consumers might consider complaining to

be a waste of effort (Sheth et al., 1999). In addition, retailers with

well-known reputations for providing fair redress often encourage

consumers to complain (Halstead and Drge, 1991). Linking with

retailer responsiveness, the likelihood of success construct refers

to the perceived probability that the retailer will remedy the

problem without protest (Blodgett and Granbois, 1992). Several

researchers have found the likelihood of success construct to be

one of the more important determinants of complaining behaviour

(Richins, 1987; Halstead and Drge, 1991; Blodgett and Granbois,

1992). Consumers who perceive the probability of success to be

high are more likely to voice their complaints, while consumers

who perceive the probability of success to be lower are more likely

to take their custom elsewhere and/or engage in negative word-of-mouth behaviour (Blodgett and Granbois, 1992). Richins (1983)

concluded that the perceived likelihood of success and trouble

involved in making a complaint correlated with negative word-of-

mouth as choice of complaint behaviour.

Several factors relate to a consumers estimate of the probability

of success (Day et al., 1981; Richins, 1983). The nature of the

product causing the dissatisfaction undoubtedly affects consum-

ers expectations of restitution. Whereas non-durable products are

usually replaced or refunded, durable products are usually repaired

rather than replaced if they are faulty. Previous experience in

seeking redress will also be valuable to a consumer in estimating

the probability of success in a new situation. Past experience in

buying and using the product is also helpful in determining the

probability of success of a complaint action (especially in the

absence of previous complaining experience or knowledge of a

stores reputation) because the consumer will understand very

well what the problem is, how it can be remedied and what the

sellers or manufacturers responsibility is (Day et al., 1981).Factors related directly to the trouble involved in making com-

plaints include the followings: making a special trip to the retailer

to complain, the time and effort in filling out forms, and difficulty

finding complaint procedures and mechanisms (Richins, 1983). If

the complaint handling mechanism for the unsatisfactory product

does not cause the consumer to go through a great deal of incon-

venience, the likelihood of formal complaining may be increased

(Halstead and Drge, 1991; Dolinsky, 1994; Huppertz, 2003).

Richins (1982) indicated that objective costs or trouble involved in

formal complaining influence peoples feelings towards complain-

ing. Formal complaining involves trouble, time and occasionally

monetary costs. The greater the perceived cost, the lower the

likelihood for complaining.

Psychological costs (contributing to the inconvenience) thatmight discourage formal complaint action include the followings:

being treated rudely or unpleasantly, being blamed for unsatisfac-

tory performance, having to bother someone in making the com-

plaint and possibly being embarrassed while complaining (Day

et al., 1981; Richins, 1983). Halstead and Drge (1991) noted

that some consumers loathe being perceived as a nuisance or as

troublemakers and that this could inhibit them from engaging in

formal complaint behaviour. Negative affect or unpleasant feelings

experienced by some consumers during the complaining process

(e.g. embarrassment or annoyance) are actually consumer-related

factors (Halstead and Drge, 1991), but because retailers have

control over the manner in which they treat their customers (the

customer is always right) and therefore may influence their cus-tomers (in)convenience experienced during the complaining

process, it is included in this discussion.

Proposed conceptual framework

The value of a soundly considered conceptual framework, based

on well-founded theory, where the indicators and possible rela-

tionships are present and which includes the research questions,

lies in the fact that it arranges the research, assists the researcher to

reach the research goals and to elicit results which in turn will be

a contribution towards establishing new theory. In the opinion of

the researchers, the suggested conceptual framework, as illustrated

in Fig. 1, can be usefully applied in research aimed at a better

understanding of complaint behaviour and consumer protection inemerging and developing countries.

As is clear from Fig. 1, prior to purchasing, consumers form

expectations of a products performance in a particular situation.

After or while using a product, consumers evaluate its perceived

performance in terms of their initial expectations for the products

performance, relating to the functional and symbolic performance

dimensions of the product. When the product does not perform

to the consumers expectations (i.e. when a performance failure

occurs or when the product performs poorly), negative disconfir-

mation occurs, leading to feelings of dissatisfaction. Feelings of




461

7/28/2019 41784502

7/13

dissatisfaction are, however, mediated by attributional reasoning,

i.e. the cognitive process of wanting to find out why a negativeoutcome or event occurred. The perceived cause (attributions) for

the products failure and the dimensional quality thereof (in terms

of Weiners theory, locus of causality, stability and controllability)

influences consumers reaction in terms of their emotions (the

level of anger experienced in response to the product failure) and

behaviours.

Consumer responses to dissatisfaction are generally referred to

as consumer complaint behaviour (Singh, 1988; Maute and

Forrester, 1993, p. 220). Once dissatisfaction occurs, the con-

sumer may engage in behavioural and non-behavioural responses

to resolve the problem (Day and Landon, 1977; Broadbridge and

Marshall, 1995). Three major options are available to consumerswho are dissatisfied with their purchase: no action, private action

or public action. Consumers may refrain from action by rational-

izing and forgetting the problem. Consumers may engage in

private actions such as switching brands or retailers, boycotting

the type of product or warning family and friends. Consumers may

also engage in public action such as seeking redress (i.e. a refund,

an exchange or free repairs and replacement of defective parts,

depending on the nature of the product and particular circum-

stances) directly from the retailer or manufacturer, complaining to

the retailer or manufacturer, a public consumer protection agency,

Figure 1 Schematic conceptual framework.

Expectations of product

performance

Actual product performance

Performance dimensions:

Functional

Symbolic

Negative

Disconfirmation(Product performance failure)

Causal attribution

Locus of control Anger

Controllability Anger

Stability Expectancy of future failure

Dissatisfaction

Product-specificvariables

Problem severityPrice

Type of productOther

CONSUMER COMPLAINT BEHAVIOURNo actionPrivate action

Negative word-of-mouth, boycott product,

boycott seller, boycott manufacturer, etc.Public action

Seek redress, complain, take legal action

Consumer-relatedvariables:

GenderAge

CultureIncomeEducationOther

Perceived Justice

Distributive, Procedural, Interactional

Justice-related emotion (Coping with the self)

Post-redress behaviour

Exit versus loyalty

Redress environment




462

7/28/2019 41784502

8/13

a voluntary organization or the media, or taking legal action

against the retailer or manufacturer. However, consumer-related

factors and product-specific factors are likely to affect the con-

sumers complaint behaviour.

Consumers, who blame the retailer for the problem and who

probably feel angry about the situation and decide to complain,

will expect redress. However, from a consumers viewpoint,

complaint-related justice is not only a matter of economic calculusbut also a procedural and interactional matter. Previous research

indicates that the consumer will again experience a so-called

justice-related emotion (anger, gratitude, etc.) that will lead to the

post-redress behaviour of loyalty vs. exit. An understanding of

the entire process will enable manufacturers, retailers, consumer

protection organizations and those who are responsible for

managing the redress environment to better comprehend

consumers complaints in order to deal with the matter more

effectively.

Implications for handling complaints

Manufacturers and retailers should createrealistic expectations for product performance

As consumers expectations are partially based on the marketing

efforts of companies, companies promotional efforts concerning

the performance of products (especially products that are associ-

ated with lifestyle) should be realistic in order to avoid creating

false expectations concerning the performance of products

(Erasmus and Donoghue, 1998; Laufer, 2002). More information

about the operation, maintenance and care of such products should

be provided to consumers via in-store marketing and advertizing

materials. Consumers who know what to expect of their product in

terms of its performance might be better able to interpret the

causes for product failures compared with consumers who are not

exactly sure what to expect. This will allow them to attributefailures to the responsible parties and to engage in complaint

action accordingly. This, in turn, will give retailers and manu-

facturers the opportunity to resolve consumers product

dissatisfactions.

Complaint handling employees should have

proper product knowledge

Before staff can handle complaints, they should first gain proper

product knowledge to facilitate them in recognizing product prob-

lems. This remains a very big challenge in South Africa because

many employees sell products and even handle complaints about

products that they have never owned or used themselves. This

implies that employers should properly train employees concern-ing the performance, and by implication the performance failures,

of the products that they sell.

Manufacturers, retailers and consumer

protections organizations should continuously

endeavour to improve the quality of products

Manufacturers should continuously improve their standards of

product quality control and retailers should only sell high quality

products, as no products are exempt from product failure.

Consumer organizations can especially assist consumers in this

regard when they, together with the media (newspapers, maga-

zines, television, radio, consumer web pages), inform consumers

about substandard products to encourage consumers to complain

about product failures and so facilitate the improvement of product

quality.

Retailers and manufacturers should notunderestimate the impact of hidden or

indirect complaint activities

Both retailers and manufacturers should be aware of, and above

all not underestimate, the impact of hidden or indirect complaint

activities such as engaging in adverse word-of-mouth marketing,

boycotting the retailer and switching brands. As word-of-mouth

communication usually occurs through sources that consumers

perceive as more accessible and as being more credible (i.e.

family, friends, reference groups), it is thought to have a very

powerful influence on consumers evaluations more than infor-

mation received through commercial sources (i.e. advertisements

and in-store marketing) (Laczniak et al., 2001). Therefore, retail-

ers and manufacturers should encourage consumers to personallyinform them about dissatisfactory products because complain-

ers are more valuable to them than non-complainers who simply

walk out and take their business to the competitor and/or talk to

friends about their negative product experiences. The effective

handling of complaints can contribute to an increased intention to

repurchase and increased positive word-of-mouth, thus increasing

the overall benefit to the manufacturer and retailer (THARP in

Davido, 2003).

Manufacturers and retailers should encourage

dissatisfied consumers to take formal

complaint action

Manufacturers and retailers can only become aware of product

shortcomings and remedy the problem when consumers directly

communicate their dissatisfaction to them (Huppertz, 2003; Kim

et al., 2003; Bodey and Grace, 2006), implying that manufacturers

and retailers should consider consumers complaints in a positive

light, i.e. as important feedback mechanisms concerning consum-

ers dissatisfaction with products (Nyer, 2000) and not as a way to

quibble, to moan and groan, to give someone a hard time, or to find

fault (Barlow and Mller, 1996). This would enable them

to remedy product problems, increase consumer satisfaction and

retain loyal customers. Therefore, manufacturers and retailers

should encourage a culture of complaining (i.e. motivate con-

sumers to complain directly or formally) instead of a spirit of

passivity, as this is the only way they will be able to know ofconsumers product dissatisfactions.

Complaint handling personnel should see

complaints through the eyes of customers to

improve their understanding of the customers

dissatisfaction

The negative connotations that are associated with complaining

should also be acknowledged and addressed to encourage com-

plaint behaviour. Complaint handling personnel should be




463

7/28/2019 41784502

9/13

attentive to the fact that some customers might be uncomfortable

with the whole process of complaining due to their specific per-

sonality characteristics. Most people find it very difficult to reveal

a part of their emotional self when complaining (Dolinsky, 1994).

Such consumers will rather opt to do nothing or engage in hidden

complaint activities than complain publicly. Compliant environ-

ments where complaint handling personnel and customers behave

in full view of an audience or other customer may be problematicfor self-conscious people. These environments need to be carefully

structured to accommodate such customers in more confidential

settings (Bodey and Grace, 2006). Therefore, online complaining

and other means of expressing dissatisfaction in writing (such as

writing a letter of complaint or completing an in-store complaint

form) to the retailer and/or manufacturer should be promoted. This

may also encourage consumers who are afraid of retribution (e.g.

the retailer/manufacturer will counterattack or will hold a grudge

which can be detrimental to future interactions) to take part in

complaint action (Kim et al., 2003; Goodman, 2006).

Good business practice requires that retailers and complaint

handling employees should adhere to the notion that the customer

is always right. However, what people believe to be the causes of

product failure are sometimes far removed from the truth. There-fore, the customer might not always be right! For example, some

customers might unintentionally blame manufacturers for product

failures rather than themselves for their own transgressions. Con-

sumers do not have control over such biases, but manufacturers

and retailers can play a role in handling this kind of predisposition.

Retailers and complaint handling employees should be aware of

these inconsistencies to facilitate their comprehension of consum-

ers dissatisfaction and anger when their products fail, even when

retailers or manufacturers are not the responsible parties. This

has implications for the formulation of complaint handling pro-

grammes to assist retailers and complaint handling employees.

Complaint handling personnel should be trained to understand

consumers reasoning underlying their complaint behaviour and todeal with complaints effectively.

Manufacturers and retailers should have

complaint policies and strategies and sound

complaint handling ethics in place

Although many retailers and manufacturers do have complaint

policies and strategies of some kind, many members of their staff

do not know how to manage customers complaints effectively.

Staff members need to be informed about the firms complaint and

return policies (especially policies concerning product warranties)

and trained in effective handling of complaints. In addition,

despite businesses having all of these strategies in place, the will to

actively resolve complaints is often lacking, contributing to con-sumers belief that it is useless to complain formally as nothing

will be gained. This implies that staff over the whole spectrum

(including sales assistants, customer service staff, complaint han-

dling staff, managers, etc.) should be encouraged to practise good

complaint handling ethics in order to increase customer satisfac-

tion, to prevent customers from taking their business to the com-

petition, or to prevent customers from going to third parties and

especially to stop them from spreading additional negative word-

of-mouth. This can only work when the whole team is committed

to effective complaint handling.

Complaint handling staff should be trained to

deal with upset customers in a friendly and

prompt manner

Companies discourage complaints when shop assistants display

negative attitudes towards complainers (e.g. when they do not

listen to customers complaints and do not respond to complaints

in a courteous manner). The reason for this is that, in addition tothe dissatisfaction due to product failure, consumers experience

further dissatisfaction due to the psychological blocks put on them

by manufacturers and retailers when these turn a deaf ear

(Barlow and Mller, 1996; Sheth et al., 1999). Manufacturers and

retailers resistance to listening and responding to consumer com-

plaints increases the likelihood that consumers will complain in

private (i.e. negative word-of-mouth to family and friends) and to

third parties (ombudsmen, local consumer agencies, trade associa-

tions, etc.) (McAlister and Erffmeyer, 2003). By simply listening

to complaints, brand loyalty can be greatly enhanced (Blodgett

and Granbois, 1992; Kim et al., 2003). Complaint handling per-

sonnel should be trustworthy, friendly, honest, helpful and con-

cerned (Palmroth in Cri, 2003).

By looking at the coping strategies (in terms of the relatedbehaviours and cognitions) that consumers employ in reducing the

stress caused by product failures, researchers can gain valuable

insights into the reasons for consumers particular complaint

behaviour. Because consumers coping behaviours and cognitions

are spurred by attributions of blame and anger (Stephens and

Gwinner, 1998), explicit action should be taken to deal with such

attributions of blame and anger. This implies that staff should be

trained to deal with upset customers, in a friendly and prompt

manner to prevent their customers from experiencing more anger

and spreading more negative word-of-mouth. It is essential for

customers to cope with their anger through a type of liberation

process. By voicing their dissatisfaction, customers get the oppor-

tunity to tell their side of the story to the manufacturer or retailerwhich make them feel better at the end of the day. It is therefore

important that complaint handling personnel should be trustworthy,

friendly, honest, helpful and concerned (Palmroth in Cri, 2003).

Dissatisfied and angry consumers usually

want sincere apologies and/or some form

of restitution

Repatronage is less likely if the complaint is unsuccessfully

redressed (Sheth et al., 1999; Nyer, 2000; Clopton et al., 2001).

Complaint handling employees should understand that dissatisfied

and angry consumers usually want some form of restitution (e.g.

price reduction, product replacement or free repair service). Even

though the provision of restitution is not always possible, the leastthat retailers and manufacturers could do is to provide a sincere

apology and explain that corrective action has been taken to ensure

that the same product problem will not recur (provided that this is

the truth).

Retailers and manufacturers should make it

easier for consumers to complain complaint

channels should be easy to use

Retailers and manufacturers should endeavour to change consum-

ers negative perceptions that complaining is not worth the time




464

7/28/2019 41784502

10/13

and effort (Kim et al., 2003) by making it easier for them to

complain. Companies should provide their mailing address,

website address, contact numbers, toll-free numbers and an invi-

tation to provide feedback, in all publicly viewed material, in-

cluding promotional communications, packaging, invoices etc.

Information leaflets and in-store communication via sales assis-

tants should be provided concerning return policies and after-sales

repair service to enable consumers to follow the correct route forcomplaint action. Customer service centres should be clearly

visible so that people may know where to go when they want to

complain. In this day and age, retailers and manufacturers should

have appropriate websites to allow consumers to complain on-line

and to enquire about corrective action. The successful implemen-

tation of the above measures will increase consumers coping

potential and might prevent them from following hidden com-

plaint actions or, even worse, engaging in third-party complaints

(i.e. contacting newspapers, legal advisors or consumer councils).

Manufacturers, retailers and consumer

protection organizations should promote

consumer rightsTo encourage consumers to complain, manufacturers and retailers

and consumer protection organizations should provide consumers

with ample information regarding their consumer rights, which

inter alia include the right to be informed, the right to be heard, the

right to redress and the right to consumer education. In African

countries, many of the newly founded consumer organizations,

which typically report to governmental agencies, are responsible

for furthering consumerism. Although the role that these organi-

zation play in consumer protection is widely accepted (i.e. provi-

sion of legislation for the protection of consumers, undertaking

and commissioning research into matters relevant to consumer

affairs, promoting consumer education and the advancement of

consumer policy), the role of non-governmental organizationsshould also be appreciated. As independent watchdogs, they draw

the attention of government and business to the concerns and

problems of civil society and provide a united voice for the con-

sumer (Rousseau, 2003a; South African National Consumer

Union, 2006). This implies that the different role-players should

join hands to persuade consumers to actively exercise their right to

complain and so help consumers to change their passive mindsets

to those of consumers that are standing up for their rights a force

to be heard and to be reckoned with! It is high time that manufac-

turers and retailers start collaborating with consumer organiza-

tions to provide consumers with relevant information concerning

their rights as consumers, whether in the form of in-store educa-

tional programmes or informative pamphlets and DVDs.

Retailers, manufacturers and consumer

organizations should have an understanding

of cross-cultural differences in

complaint behaviour

An understanding of cross-cultural differences in complaint

behaviour, in terms of the individualistic (Euro-centric) and col-

lectivistic (Afro-centric) dimensions of culture, could be helpful to

manufacturers, retailers and consumer organizations to develop

effective complaint resolution strategies. This implies that a need

exists for research to provide richer insights regarding cross-

cultural complaint behaviour. Manufacturers and retailers need to

realize that the process of acculturation in many developing coun-

tries has important implications for the development of marketing

strategies to assist and empower consumers and to retain loyal

consumers. Marketers, retailers and manufacturers should use

ubuntu (an indigenous South African term describing societal/

community supportiveness and cohesion) (Mbigi and Maree inRousseau, 2003b) to their best advantage by encouraging the mul-

ticultural society of many developing countries to actively partici-

pate in public (formal) complaint behaviour.

Conclusion

Bearing the implications of the effective handling of complaints

for the retailer and the consumer in mind, it is not difficult to

comprehend why Barlow and Mller (1996) use the metaphor of

complaints as gifts and Sanes (1993) considers complaints as

hidden treasures. Barlow and Mller (1996) further state that the

time has come for all businesses to think of complaint handling as

a strategic tool and a marketing asset, rather than an annoyance.

It is therefore essential that the management of consumer-orientated companies understand the value of paying attention to

and dealing with consumer complaints (Sheth et al., 1999; Kim

et al., 2003; Goodman, 2006). Implementing fair policies concern-

ing redress procedures and companies appropriate reaction to

complaints are legitimate and ethical acts towards the consumer

(Terblanche and Boshoff, 2001, 2003; Cri, 2003).

Training programmes that focus on an understanding of the

complaint message and the delivery of the message by the com-

plainant, and the employees response, are essential to enhance

employees ability to handle complaints (Broadbridge and Mar-

shall, 1995; Hill et al., 2000). The manufacturers and retailers

response to the complaint is critical when complaints are

handled satisfactorily from the consumers point of view, manu-facturers and retailers might retain customers who have been dis-

appointed by the dissatisfactory product in the first place (Davido,

2003). Therefore, the effective handling of complaints can prevent

a second round of dissatisfaction.

By providing a medium for dissatisfied consumers to complain,

companies have the opportunity to resolve problems (whether they

are company or consumer induced), provide explanations and/or

appropriate forms of redress, increase consumer satisfaction, retain

consumers as active purchasers and increase marketplace efficiency

(Sanes, 1993; Hogarth and English, 2002; Huppertz, 2003; Kim

et al., 2003). However, this requires that consumers must commu-

nicate to retailers and manufacturers in the first placeto allow them

to read their customers mind (to allow them to become aware of

their cognitions). When consumers leave quietly and take part inhidden complaint actions, retailers and manufacturers will never

know why and will therefore never get the opportunity to resolve

such problems (Cri, 2003; Bodey and Grace, 2006). As such,

negative word-of-mouth communications are generally considered

to be detrimental to retailers and manufacturers (Halstead, 2002;

Rousseau, 2003a) because they can damage the companys reputa-

tion (Richins, 1983; Clopton et al., 2001), resulting in the loss of

potential and existing consumers (Stephens and Gwinner, 1998) as

well as negatively affecting the companys revenue (Sanes, 1993;

Broadbridge and Marshall, 1995).




465

7/28/2019 41784502

11/13

Apart form the obvious benefits for retailers and manufacturers

in receiving complaints from customers, the individual consumer

can also enjoy practical and psychological (latent) benefits asso-

ciated with the act of complaining to companies (Nyer, 2000).

Such practical benefits for the individual include the possibility of

obtaining redress, the opportunity to prevent the manufacturer or

retailer from selling a bad product (policing the marketplace) and

the opportunity to assert ones rights as a consumer. In a psycho-logical sense, complaint action might be used as a vehicle to vent

anger or frustration or to elude a sense of guilt for not complaining

(Day et al., 1981; Nyer, 1997). Thus, being able to register a

complaint, to have it investigated and to receive feedback on that

investigation is an important mechanism for protecting and

empowering consumers (Hogarth and English, 2002).

Complaint data viewed in a vacuum is hard to interpret, but

when it is linked to data on consumers cognitions and emotions as

well as other consumer-related variables, product-specific vari-

ables and redress environment variables, it becomes a powerful

tool to understand consumers complaint behaviour. More con-

sumer research, focusing on post-purchase expectations, levels of

dissatisfaction, product failures, complaint behaviour and factors

affecting complaining behaviour concerning consumer products,should be undertaken to help us understand the way in which

consumers view complaining.Although consumers cognitions for

complaint behaviour are not obvious to retailers and manufactur-

ers, an understanding of consumers reasoning prior to engaging in

particular complaint actions, as well as the emotions involved,

might contribute to the improvement of organizational strategies

to convince consumers to engage in overt and direct voicing of

their dissatisfaction rather than in covert actions.

References

Arnold, M.B. (1960) Perennial problems in the field of emotion. In

Feelings and Emotions (ed. by M.B. Arnold), pp. 169203. AcademicPress, New York.

Au, K., Hui, M.K. & Leung, K. (2001) Who should be responsible?

Effects of voice and compensation on responsibility attribution, per-

ceived justice, and post-complaint behaviors across cultures. The

International Journal of Conflict Management, 12, 350364.

Bagozzi, R.P., Mahesh, G. & Prashanth, U.N. (1999) The role of emo-

tions in marketing. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 27,

184206.

Barlow, J. & Mller, C. (1996) A Complaint Is a Gift. Berret-Koehler,

San Francisco, CA.

Barnes, J.G. & Kelloway, K.K. (1980) Consumerists: complaining

behavior and attitudes toward social and consumer issues. Advances

in Consumer Research, 7, 329334.

Berry, L.L. & Parasuraman, A. (1994) Improved service quality in

America: lessons learned. Academic Management Executive, 8,

3238.

Blodgett, J. & Granbois, D. (1992) Toward an integrated conceptual

model of consumer complaining behavior. Journal of Consumer Satis-

faction, Dissatisfaction and Complaining Behavior, 5, 93103.

Blodgett, J., Hill, D. & Tax, S.S. (1997) The effects of distributive, pro-

cedural and interactional justice on post-complaint behavior. Journal

of Retailing, 73, 185210.

Blodgett, J., Hill, D. & Bakir, A. (2006) Cross-cultural complaining

behavior? An alternative explanation. Journal of Consumer Satisfac-

tion, Dissatisfaction and Complaining Behavior, 19, 103117.

Bodey, K. & Grace, D. (2006) Segmenting service complainers and

non-complainers on the basis of consumer characteristics. Journal of

Services Marketing, 20, 178187.

Broadbridge, A. & Marshall, J. (1995) Consumer complaint behavior:

the case of electrical goods. International Journal of Retail & Distri-

bution Management, 23, 818.

Carlson, L., Walsh, A., Laczniak, R. & Grossbart, S. (1994) Family

communication pattern and marketplace motivations, attitudes, and

behaviours of children and mothers. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 28,2553.

Chebat, J. & Slusarczyk, W. (2005) How emotions mediate the effects

of perceived justice on loyalty in service recovery situations: an

empirical study. Journal of Business Research, 58, 664673.

Clopton, S.W., Stoddard, J.E. & Clay, J.W. (2001) Salesperson charac-

teristics affecting consumer complaint responses. Journal of Con-

sumer Behaviour, 1, 124139.

Cri, D. (2003) Consumers complaint behaviour. Taxonomy, typology

and determinants: towards a unified ontology. Journal of Database

Marketing & Customer Strategy Management, 11, 6079.

Davido, M. (2003) Have you heard the word? The effect of word of

mouth on perceived justice, satisfaction and repurchasing intentions

following complaint handling. Journal of consumer Satisfaction Dis-

satisfaction and Complaining Behavior, 16, 6780.

Day, R.L. & Landon, E.L. Jr (1977) Towards a theory of consumercomplaining behavior. In Consumer and Industrial Buying Behaviour

(ed. by A.G. Woodside, I.N. Sheth & P.D. Bennet), pp. 229242.

North-Holland, New York.

Day, R.L., Grabicke, K., Schaetzle, T. & Staubach, F. (1981) The hidden

agenda of consumer complaining. Journal of Retailing, 57, 86106.

Dolinsky, A.L. (1994) A consumer complaint framework with resulting

strategies. An application to higher education. Journal of Services

Marketing, 3, 2739.

Donoghue, S. (2008) An explanation of consumer complaint behaviour

concerning performance failure of major electrical household appli-

ances. PhD thesis. University of Pretoria, SA.

Ellis, A. (1975) A New Guide to Rational Living. Prentice-Hall, Engle-

wood Cliffs, NJ.

Erasmus, A.C. & Donoghue, S. (1998) Consumer satisfaction an unat-

tainable ideal? Journal for Family Ecology and Consumer Sciences,26, 3542.

Folkes, V.S. (1984) Consumer reactions to product failure: an attribu-

tional approach. Journal of Consumer Research, 10, 398409.

Frsterling, F. (2001) Attribution: An Introduction to Theories,

Research, and Applications. Psychology Press, East Sussex.

Giese, J.L. & Cote, J.A. (2000) Defining consumer satisfaction.

Academy of Marketing Science Review, 1, 124.

Goodman, J. (2006) Manage complaints to enhance loyalty. Quality

Progress, 39, 2834.

Goodwin, C. & Spiggle, S. (1989) Consumer complaining: attributions

and identities. Advances in Consumer Research, 16, 1722.

Halstead, D. (2002) Negative word of mouth: substitute for or supple-

ment to consumer complaints. Journal of Consumer Satisfaction, Dis-

satisfaction and Complaining Behavior, 15, 112.

Halstead, D. & Drge, C. (1991) Consumer attitudes toward complain-

ing and the prediction of multiple complaint responses. Advances in

Consumer Research, 18, 210216.

Hill, D.I., Baer, R.B. & Morgan, A.J. (2000) Excuses: use em if you

got em. Advances in Consumer Research, 27, 8791.

Hogarth, J.M. & English, M.P. (2002) Consumer complaints and

redress: an important mechanism for protecting and empowering con-

sumers. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 26, 217226.

Huppertz, J.W. (2003) An effort model of first-stage complaining behav-

iour. Journal of Consumer Satisfaction, Dissatisfaction and Com-

plaining Behavior, 16, 132144.




466

7/28/2019 41784502

12/13

Kau, A. & Loh, E.W. (2006) The effects of service recovery on con-

sumer satisfaction: a comparison between complaints and non-

complaints. Journal of Services Marketing, 20, 101111.

Kim, C., Kim, S., Im, S. & Shin, C. (2003) The effect of attitude and

perception on consumer complaint intentions. Journal of Consumer

Marketing, 20, 352371.

Kincade, D.H., Giddings, V.I. & Chen-Yu, H.J. (1998) Impact of

product-specific variables on consumers post-consumption behavior

for apparel products: USA. Journal of Consumer Studies and HomeEconomics, 22, 8190.

Laczniak, R.N., Decarlo, T.E. & Ramaswami, N. (2001) Consumers

responses to negative word-of-mouth communication: an attribution

theory perspective. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 11, 5773.

Laufer, D. (2002) Are antecedents of consumer dissatisfaction and con-

sumer attributions for product failures universal? Advances in Con-

sumer Research, 29, 312317.

Lazarus, R.S. (1966) Psychological Stress and the Coping Process.

McGraw-Hill, New York.

Lazarus, R.S. & Lazarus, B.N. (1994) Passion and Reason. Making

Sense of Our Emotions. Oxford University Press, New York.

Liu, R.R. & McClure, P. (2001) Recognizing cross-cultural differences

in consumer complaint behavior and intentions: an empirical exami-

nation. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 18, 5475.

McAlister, D.T. & Erffmeyer, R.C. (2003) A content analysis of out-comes and responsibilities for consumer complaints to third-party

organizations. Journal of Business Research, 56, 341351.

McGregor, S.L.T. (1999) Socializing consumers in a global marketplace.

Journal of Consumer Studies and Home Economics, 23, 3744.

Maheswaran, D. & Shavitt, S. (2000) Issues and new directions in

global consumer psychology. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 2,

5966.

Mattsson, J., Lemmink, J. & McColl, R. (2004) The effect of verbalized

emotions on loyalty in written complaints. Total Quality Management,

15, 941958.

Maute, M.F. & Forrester, W.R. Jr (1993) The structure and determinants

of consumer complaint intentions and behavior. Journal of Economic

Psychology, 14, 219247.

Moschis, G.P. (1987) Consumer Socialization: A Life-Cycle Perspective.

Lexington, Boston, MA.Ndubisi, N.O. & Ling, T.Y. (2006) Complaint behaviour of Malaysian

consumers. Management Research News, 29, 6576.

Nyer, P.U. (1997) A study of the relationships between cognitive

appraisal and consumption emotions. Journal of the Academy of Mar-

keting Science, 25, 296304.

Nyer, P.U. (2000) An investigation into whether complaining can cause

increased consumer satisfaction. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 17,

919.

Parkinson, B. (1996) Emotions are social. British Journal of Psychol-

ogy, 87, 663683.

Phau, I. & Sari, R.P. (2004) Engaging in complaint behavior: an

Indonesian perspective. Marketing Intelligence and Planning, 22,

407426.

Richins, M.L. (1982) An investigation of consumers attitudes toward

complaining. Advances in Consumer Research, 9, 502506.

Richins, M.L. (1983) Negative word-of-mouth by dissatisfied consum-

ers: a pilot study. Journal of Marketing, 47, 6878.

Richins, M.L. (1987) A multivariate analysis of responses to dissatisfac-

tion. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 15, 2431.

Rousseau, D. (2003a) Consumerism and social responsibility. In A

Multi-Cultural App roach to Consumer Decision-Making in South

Africa, 3rd edn. (ed. by P.J. du Plessis & G.G. Rousseau), pp. 446

471. Oxford University Press, Cape Town, SA.

Rousseau, D. (2003b) Cultural influences on buyer behaviour. In AMulti-Cultural App roach to Consumer Decision-Making in South

Africa, 3rd edn. (ed. by P.J. du Plessis & G.G. Rousseau), pp. 397

414. Oxford University Press, Cape Town, SA.

Sanes, C. (1993) Complaints are hidden treasures. The Journal for

Quality and Participation, 16, 7883.

Scher, S.J. & Heise, R. (1993) Affect and the perception of injustice.

Advocate Group Process, 10, 223252.

Schoefer, K. & Diamantopoulos, A. (2008) Measuring experienced emo-

tions during service recovery encounters: construction and assessment

of the ESRE scale. Service Business, 2, 6581.

Sharma, P. & Marshall, R. (2005) Investigating individual differences in

customer complaint behaviour: towards a comprehensive conceptual

framework. Proceedings of the 2005 Academy of Marketing. Science

Annual Conference. Tampa, Florida, USA.

Sheth, J.N., Mittal, B. & Newman, B.I. (1999) Customer Behavior:Consumer Behavior and Beyond. Dryden Press, Fort Worth, TX.

Singh, J. (1988) Consumer complaint intentions and behavior: defini-

tional and taxonomical issues. Journal of Marketing, 52, 93107.

Singh, J. (1990) A typology of consumer dissatisfaction response styles.

Journal of Retailing, 66, 5799.

South African National Consumer Union (2006) Buy Right Consumer

Guide for South Africa, 2nd edn. (ed. by I. Opperman & L.

Moolman). Protea Book House, Pretoria, SA.

Stephens, N. & Gwinner, K.P. (1998) Why dont some people com-

plain? A cognitive-emotive process model of consumer complaint

behavior. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 26, 172189.

Swanson, S.R. & Kelley, S.W. (2001) Attributions and outcomes of the

service recovery process. Journal of Marketing Theory & Practice, 9,

5065.

Terblanche, N.S. & Boshoff, C. (2001) Measuring customer satisfactionwith the controllable elements of the in-store shopping experience.

South African Journal of Business Management, 32, 1120.

Terblanche, N.S. & Boshoff, C. (2003) The controllable elements of the

total retail experience: a study of clothing shoppers. South African

Journal of Economic and Management Sciences, 6, 143158.

Tronvoll, B. (2007) Complainer characteristics when exit is closed.

International Journal of Service Industry Management, 18, 2551.

Velzquez, B.M., Contr, G.B., Saura, I.G. & Blasco, M.F. (2006) Ante-

cedents to complaint behaviour in the context of restaurant goers.

International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research,

16, 493517.

Weiner, B. (1986) An Attributional Theory of Motivation and Emotion .

Springer-Verlag, New York.

Weiner, B. (2000) Attributional thought about consumer behavior.

Journal of Consumer Research, 27, 382387.




467

7/28/2019 41784502

13/13

Documents

41784502