Identifying Appropriate Compensation Types for Service Failures

Abstract

This article examines how compensation type and failure type explain the recovery effect of compensation, using a meta-analysis (Study 1) and an experiment (Study 2). Drawing on resource exchange theory, we propose new classifications for both compensation and failure type and find three major results. First, consistent with our matching hypothesis, the strongest recovery effect is generally observed when compensation represents a resource similar to the failure it is supposed to offset, that is, immediate monetary compensation for a monetary failure, exchange for a flawed product, reperformance for a failed service, and psychological compensation for lack of attention. Surprisingly, lack of attention may also be rectified by the other compensation types. Second, consistent with our intertemporal choice hypothesis, immediate monetary compensation is generally more effective than delayed monetary compensation. Yet, this effect also varies with failure type. Third, resource-based classifications explain the recovery effect of compensation better than current classifications of compensation and failure type. As a theoretical contribution, the resource-based classifications help to explain the fluctuating effect sizes of compensation reported in prior research. From a managerial point of view, practitioners can choose the appropriate compensation type for a failure, one that repays in kind what customers have lost. As a result, companies achieve stronger recovery effects without additional costs.