In this chapter we discuss how the word complaint has different and negative meanings, we discuss how disatisfied customers behave, how this behaviour affects/effects the organisation, the benefits to organisations that manage the recovery process, how a learning culture can provide a ROI, and the characteristics of misbehaving customers. 

What we discover that for a variety of reasons many people do not like to complain and therefore complaints made to an organisation may only be a sample.

What we also find is that we all know people who treat the act of complaining as a sport.

A number of marketing scholars [e.g., Adrian Palmer] employ the ‘leaky bucket’ metaphor to convey the importance of retaining customers. The basic premise is that a leaky bucket needs a constant supply of new water to keep the bucket topped up. The more the bucket leaks the more water is required to keep it topped up. To reduce the amount of new water required, it makes sense to plug the leaks. Similarly – to reduce the cost of attracting and converting new customers it makes sense to retain more existing customers – one way is by managing episodes of dissatisfaction.

We have stated that no customer would enter an exchange if they expected to be dissatisfied and that organisations that practice  a marketing philosophy have the intention of satisfying each customer. These two factors highlight that every episode of customer dissatisfaction is a deviation from both the customer’s pre-purchase expectations and the organisation’s pre-purchase intentions. When marketing practitioners view episodes of dissatisfaction as a deviation from standards then a new customer retention paradigm [way of thinking] is revealed.

On one hand we have this word with negative connotations and receiving/making complaints is a stressful event. Yet we say tha we should welcome complaints. One way is to change the language and refer to complaints as ‘expressions of disatisfaction’.

Keep in mind: A low level of complaints may not indicate a high  level of satisfaction

Strauss and Seidel (2004) state that many businesses operate on the false assumption that a low number of complaints indicates a high level of satisfaction. Whereas it may mean that customers find it difficult or pointless to express their dissatisfaction. Or it may indicate that the consumer’s perceptions of the cost of complaining in money, time, and effort will be higher than the expected return. This false assumption that low levels of complaints is due to high customer satisfaction is often compounded internally when organisations quote the results of customer [or employee] satisfaction surveys. What is often missing from such ‘surveys’ is a measurement of the customers who have already defected. Therefore, the figures are likely to demonstrate higher satisfaction levels than is the case.

Gronroos [he is worth reading] advocates that good quality does not cost as much as poor quality. Q: In what ways does poor quality add to the costs of doing business?

One of the underlying threads of marketing is that it is the customer who determines whether a product is of quality and value.

Q: Why would people drive to a shop like Frank’s when other shops and supermarkets are more convenient?

Q: Consider a larger organisation – an automobile manufacturer – how could they harness complaints to reduces ‘costs’ and to meet their marketing objectives? Also give that the industry is competitive if this is an industry practice do automobile manufactures have a choice?

Q: Should organisations that have adopted the marketing concept and are practicing a marketing philosophy encourage dialogue with customers wher there is an opportunity to express dissatisfaction?

As we have discussed when evaluating the organisations performance [which will determine future behaviour] áll customers will evaluate what was received against what was expected and it will be a continuum with dissatisfaction > neutral > satisfaction as key point on the continuum. Keep in mind how the customer communicates is out of the organisation’s control, however, the objective is reduce negative WOM and increase positive WOM [through satisfaction]. 

As we have discussed when evaluating the organisations performance [which will determine future behaviour] áll customers will evaluate what was received against what was expected and it will be a continuum with dissatisfaction > neutral > satisfaction as key point on the continuum. Keep in mind how the customer communicates is out of the organisation’s control, however, the objective is reduce negative WOM and increase positive WOM [through satisfaction]. 

Brown, Mowen, Donavan, and Licata (2002) state that good relations between an employee and her/his supervisor are paramount. In addition, they state, how an employee rates themselves and how the supervisor rates the employee can influence their orientation to customer service. Other identified traits that affected employee performance include the employee’s degree of: introversion, instability, agreeability, conscientiousness, openness and activity (Brown et al., 2002). Clearly how introverted or extroverted will influence whether someone is more suited to a back-stage or a front-stage role, how stable they are will influence their focus on work tasks, their degree of agreeability will influence their reactions to other people, their degree of consciousness will influence how productive they are, their degree of openness will influence their willingness to share information and their degree of activity will determine their willingness to complete tasks.

Whether an organistion has adopted the production, selling or the marketing concept will influence their philosophy regarding complaints and managing customer relationship. Some will see it as an unfortunate part of doing business and will have an organisational centric view. Perhaps you have an experience where you were made to feel that you were ‘guilty’ or a ‘time waster’ and impediments were put in the way when you tried to resolve the situation.

The view that is inkeeping with the marketing philosophy is to learn from the event, to see satsfaction as the goal [think long-term] and to reduce incidences of dissatisfaction in the future and reduce costs. Keep in mind people [staff and customers] are human and mistakes will happen.

This customer retention thinking suggests that customer ‘complaints’ have a value to an organisation – some say they are a ‘gift’ (Quinn, 2006). Managers should consider a complaint as a customer’s evaluation of the delivered quality and value of the product compared with a customer’s estimations of the expected product. Q: What is your opinion – are complaints a gift?

Read this slide and consider the wisdom in this quote.

Feargal Quinn was a Irish supermarket owner who was well recognised as a customer focused retailer

SUPERQUINN