Research topic:

Effect of Service Recovery on Initial Disconfirmation, Recovery

Disconfirmation, Satisfaction and Customer Switching Intension‖ in E-
Business Context.

Submitted To:
Dr. Muhammad Saifuddin Khan
Associate Professor
School of Business and Economics
North South University
Submitted By:
Zardar Rafid Sayeed
ID: 2025078660
Date: 10th September, 2021

1
 Letter of Transmittal

10th September, 2021

Dr. Muhammad Saifuddin Khan

Associate Professor

North South University, Bangladesh

Subject: Submission of Research Proposal on Effect of Service Recovery on Initial Disconfirmation, Recovery
Disconfirmation, Satisfaction and Customer Switching Intension‖ in E-Business Context.

Dear Sir,

This is to inform you that I am Zardar Rafid Sayeed, student of your BUS-535, Section-04. It gives me pleasure
that I have completed the Research Proposal on Effect of Service Recovery on Initial Disconfirmation, Recovery
Disconfirmation, Satisfaction and Customer Switching Intension‖ in E-Business Context. I have tried my level best
to use the knowledge that I have got through this course. I hope that my Research proposal will give you the
enormous pleasure according to your requirement.

I would like to request you to accept my Research Proposal for further assessment.

Sincerely,

Zardar Rafid Sayeed-2025078660

2
 Acknowledgement

Firstly, I would like to thank my faculty Dr. Muhammad Saifuddin Khan for having faith on me and giving me the
opportunity to work in this Research proposal. During the preparation of the paper I had to overcome many
difficulties which made me more knowledgeable and thus enabled me to complete this paper. I would like to
show my gratitude to Dr. Muhammad Saifuddin Khan, North South University, Bangladesh for giving me a good
guideline for the Research paper throughout numerous consultations.

3
Contents

Introduction..............................................................................................................................................................5
Literature Review:.....................................................................................................................................................9
Research Model.......................................................................................................................................................16
Research Questions and Hypothesis:......................................................................................................................16
Research Design/ Methodology..............................................................................................................................17
Data Analysis and Expected Outcomes....................................................................................................................17
Limitations of the study:..........................................................................................................................................17
Research Schedule/Timeline...................................................................................................................................18
Conclusion...............................................................................................................................................................18
References...............................................................................................................................................................19
Appendices..............................................................................................................................................................23

4
Introduction
Service quality and service recovery has been found to play a significant role in customer satisfaction and future
purchase intentions. It does not matter how excellent the service a company delivers, every company still often
makes mistakes in meeting the expectations of today‘s customers, who tend to be more demanding and less
loyal than ever before. Bitner (1993) argues that due to the unique nature of services it is impossible to ensure
100% error-free service. Even the most customer-oriented organization with the strongest quality program is
unlikely to be able to eliminate all service failures (del Río-Lanza, 2009). Service failure causes customer
dissatisfaction with the service provider, and due to that customers may exit silently, spread a negative word-of-
mouth, voice their complaints to the operator, or continue to patronage the same service provider despite their
dissatisfaction (Kim et al., 2009). Therefore, service recovery is a moment of truth for the company, which is
critical for satisfying its customers as well as strengthening its relationships with them (Blodgett et al., 1997;
Smith & Bolton, 2002).

Service recovery refers to the actions an organization takes in order to respond to a service failure (Gronroos,
1988). Service recovery strategies are strategies practiced by an organization and its employees to return the
customer to a state of satisfaction (Danaher & Mattsson, 1994; Sparks & McColl-Kennedy, 2001). It is important
to understand how customers‘ perceptions of service failure and recovery may impact switching intentions. By
extending the expectancy disconfirmation model, I propose and empirically test a customer switching intentions
model in a service failure and recovery context. Specifically, we examine how initial disconfirmation and recovery
disconfirmation influence satisfaction and subsequently impact switching intentions when a service failure occurs
and a recovery offer is given (Oliver, 1997). The ultimate goal of service recovery is to pacify dissatisfied
customers through appropriate actions in order to reduce potential damage to customer relationships caused by
service failures (Ha & Jang, 2009; Zemke, 1993).

My research study will be based on the context of e-business service failure and recovery. The aim of this paper
is to analyze the impact of a service failure on customer satisfaction in the online context. Specifically, the
objectives are to examine the impact of e-business service quality and recovery on satisfaction, and to analyze
the customers switching intention in the services of e-business company‘s. In this paper I tried to cover problem
statement, purpose of the study, Literature Review, Questions and Hypothesis, Sampling and Research Design,
References, Appendix etc.

5
Problem Statement

Ideal

Service recovery refers to the actions of service firms in response to service failure. The objective is to maintain
the business relationship with the customer. This argument was based on the premise that customer satisfaction
ensures customer satisfaction, repeat sales and positive words of mouth communications (Boshoff and Staude,
2003). Effective service recovery also leads to enhance perceptions of the quality of the products and service
already bought enhanced perceptions of the firm‘s competence, and a favorable image in term of perceived
quality and value (Kelley and Davis, 1994, Boshoff, and Staude, 2003). There are several steps in service recovery
process.

Anticipating means understanding customer expectations at key points along the experience pathway. If Service
providers have a clear idea about what the customer expects at each point along the experience pathway, they
can anticipate and prepare for them. So to avoid dissatisfaction, service providers should be able to anticipate
customers need at each step. Service recovery begins the moment service providers recognize that expectations
are not met. At that point, it is vital that they acknowledge the problem and the customer‘s feelings. Service
providers should not argue rather they should accept their responsibility for acting on the customer‘s complaint.
Service providers should offer alternatives whenever possible is a method for helping dissatisfied customers
regain a sense of control rather than telling customers what they can‘t have. Making amends is another option. It
can be as simple as making sincere apology, sending a follow up letter or may include a small gift or token of
appreciation. Apart from these service providers should educate their staffs about expectations and engage them
in anticipating customer needs. And they should train their staff in communication skills for handling dissatisfied
customers, including acknowledging and apologizing when dissatisfaction occurs. (Kristin Baird,RN,BSN,MHA).

Reality:

There are several issues that actually hinder effective service recovery strategies. Most organizations do not train
their employees adequately. As a result they don‘t know anything about handling customer‘s complaints. As a
result they don‘t want to accept their fault. Thus dissatisfaction results, some of the employees seem careless
about the problems of a customer. (Kristin Baird,RN,BSN,MHA). Frontline employees are the ones who should
deal with customer complaint. Effective service recovery can be especially difficult for services provided over the
internet for a number of reasons. First, it is difficult to retain online customers (Srinivasan et al., 2002). Second; it
is easy for customers to switch their online providers (Yang & Peterson, 2004). Finally it is difficult to create and
strengthen online relationship as customers are often primarily motivated by low prices (Shankar, smith, &
6
Rangaswamy, 2003, Stcokdale, 2007). There are two main problems existing in many organizations about the
frontline employees nowadays. (1) Common wisdom is that measures focus attention and organizations obtain
the employee behaviors they reward. Recovery, in practice, has little support in this sense. Traditional service
quality reward systems may stop recovery by rewarding branches, employees or service centers for their low
rates of complaints, which are assumed to bring high customer satisfaction. Therefore, frontline employees are
always sending dissatisfied customer away instead of admitting that it got a problem, which is considered to be
the first step of recovery. More broadly, traditional service quality measurement and reward systems focus on
obtaining of new customers but not on providing service recovery of a potential customer loss because of a
service failure. (McCollough,1995).(2) Even if empowerment of the front employees is the key for a given
situation; it is often finished poorly -the right thing always done the wrong way. The thing is employees are
always set free of rules and regulations to decide how to satisfy the customer but then receive little or no
training, resources, or boundaries for how they might recover dissatisfied customers most appropriately. In
addition, managers might think that they don‘t need to invest much effort on frontline employee ((McCollough,
1995)

Consequences:

Initial disconfirmation refers to the discrepancy between service failure expectation (expectations that the
service might fail) and service performance (initial perceptions of the service performance) (McCollough et al.,
2000). Satisfaction is considered to be a function of both initial and recovery disconfirmations (McCollough et al.,
2000). Service providers should train their employees adequately to handle customer‘s complaints in such a way
so that Customers become satisfied. Because positive disconfirmations leads to satisfaction and negative
disconfirmations leads to dissatisfaction. Thus it is expected that the more positive the initial result
disconfirmation, the greater the satisfaction. Service providers should recover service failure in such a way so
that their performance exceeds recovery expectations which will lead to positive recovery disconfirmation.
Service providers should provide prompt recovery to the customers, because if they get quick recovery they will
become satisfied. And satisfied customers are more likely to repurchase, engaging in positive word of mouth
advertising and their switching intension will be less whereas dissatisfied customers are more likely to engage in
negative word of mouth advertising, make complaints to others or third parties and switch to competitors
(Gladwell, 2000).Customer satisfaction increases customer intention rate (Ranaweera & Prabhu, 2003; Rene, Art,
& Russell, 2009). Organizations should provide recovery in such a way so that customers don‘t intent to switch to
another provider or their competitors. Switching costs refer to the time, efforts, and money involved in switching
7
to a new service provider (Dwyer & Tanner, 2002; Heide & Weiss, 1995; Lee & Cunningham, 2001). Switching
cost is related to switching intention. Because if customers get dissatisfied at first they will make their intention
to switch to other provider and then they will think about costs switching to other providers. And when it comes
to e-business, service provider should increase e-service quality so that customers become satisfied and don‘t
switch to other provider.

Purpose of the Study:

The purposes of the study are:

• To analyze the impact of a service failure on customer satisfaction in the e-business.

• To examine the impact of e-service quality and recovery on satisfaction.

• To analyze how initial and Recovery disconfirmations influence satisfaction when a service failure occurs.

Contribution of the study

Business research is very important in commercial world. Business research is an effective tool to assist in
business planning. It is about collecting information that provides an insight into customers thinking, buying
patterns, and location. In addition, market research can also assist us to monitor market trends and keep an eye
on what our competition is doing. This business research is all about service recovery. From this research a
business can understand how service recovery has to provide when the service has failed and customers intend
to switch in e-business. Our research study is based on the context of e-business service failure, recovery and
customers switching intension. So it will help to analyze the impact of a service failure on customer switching
intension in the e-business.

The result of this study will expose the importance and impact of service failure and recovery in E-business in
Bangladesh. Everyone will be able to know how to provide an excellent service recovery in e-business context
when service fails and their customers are intend to switch.

8
Literature Review:
Initial Disconfirmation

Initial disconfirmation refers to the discrepancy between service failure expectations (expectation that the
service might fail) and service performance (initial perceptions of the service performance) (McCollough et al.,
2000). When consumer requests are not satisfactorily fulfilled, services are not well-delivered, or delivered
services are lower than minimum expectations, then service failures occur (Bitner et al., 1990, 1994). Service
failures could occur at any moment during a customer-service provider contact (Carlzon, 1987). As mentioned
earlier, we define satisfaction as a specific service transaction judgment, not a general attitude. Therefore,
satisfaction is considered to be a function of both initial and recovery disconfirmations (McCollough et al., 2000).

The satisfaction at the moment when customers decide how the service is being delivered without the
occurrence of service failure is considered initial satisfaction (Carlzon, 1987). Based on the expectancy
disconfirmation model, positive disconfirmation leads to satisfaction and negative disconfirmation results in
dissatisfaction. Thus, it is expected that the more positive the initial disconfirmation, the greater the satisfaction.

As individual service encounters increase, customer complaints and dissatisfaction with services have become
the focus of managerial and scholarly inquiry. Firms can increase their profits by 25–85% if they reduce their
customer defection rate by 5% (Reichheld & Sasser, 1990), therefore, it is essential for firms to effectively
minimize customers‘ switching intentions.

Although satisfied customers are more likely to stay with current service providers (Oliver, 1997; Szymanski &
Henard, 2001), the impact of service satisfaction on customer retention is complicated (Mittal & Kamakura, 2001;
Oliver, 1997). Customer satisfaction with a consumption experience partially determines whether the customer
stays with a particular company or switches to a competitor. However, customer satisfaction cannot completely
explain customer retention (Burnham, Frels, & Mahajan, 2003).

That is, satisfied customers may decide to switch, whereas dissatisfied customers may stay, which is inconsistent
with the rational consumer behavior assumption. While one stream of research focuses on investigating
customer retention and switching intentions from a positive perspective, such as how to satisfy customers in
order to increase customer retention and decrease switching intentions, another stream of research examines
this issue from a negative perspective, such as how service failure (Bitner, Booms, & Mohr, 1994; Bitner, Booms,
& Tetreault, 1990), service recovery (Gro¨nroos, 1988; Zemke & Schaaf, 1989) and recovery expectations (Tax,
Brown, & Chandrashekaran, 1998), influence customer retention and switching intentions.

9
Service operations are inherently prone to failure; therefore, it is impossible for service providers to always
successfully fulfil customers‘ requests. Service failures result in negative post purchase behaviors, such as
switching, complaining, and negative word-of-mouth advertising (Huang & 29 Chang, 2008). While prior studies
have placed an emphasis on the positive relationships between satisfaction, customer loyalty and repurchase
intentions (Gronholdt, Martensen, & Kristensen, 2000; Maxham, 2001; Olsen, 2002), the impact of service failure
and recovery on switching intentions is still an area that has not been well researched (Huang & Chang, 2008).

By extending the expectancy disconfirmation model (Oliver, 1997), I propose and empirically test a customer
switching intentions model in a service failure and recovery context. Specifically, I would examine how initial
disconfirmation and recovery disconfirmation influence satisfaction and subsequently impact switching
intentions when a service failure occurs and a recovery offer is given.

Therefore, this research extends the expectancy disconfirmation model (Oliver, 1997) from disconfirmation and
satisfaction (Churchill & Surprenant, 1982) to switching intentions in a service failure and recovery domain. In
addition, I will examine satisfaction from two perspectives, initial and recovery disconfirmations, as prior studies
focused on initial disconfirmation and few studies have investigated how recovery disconfirmation influences
satisfaction and subsequently impacts switching intentions. Smith and Bolton (2002) indicate that service failure
recovery is important to satisfaction and switching. Proper recovery initiatives can lead to customer loyalty
(Levesque & McDougall, 2000; Tax & Brown, 1998).

Thus, in addition to initial disconfirmation, the recovery disconfirmation is also an important antecedent of
satisfaction. Moreover, switching costs are considered an effective marketing strategy by which to constrain
consumer behavior (Klemperer, 1995) and generate repeat purchases (Weiss & Heide, 1993). Thus, it should be
considered when examining the relationship between satisfaction and switching intentions. If the performance is
higher than expected, then a positive disconfirmation occurs, which leads to satisfaction. If the performance is
consistent with the expectations, then a simple confirmation occurs, which leads to satisfaction. However, if the
performance is lower than expected, and then a negative disconfirmation occurs, which leads to dissatisfaction.
That is, higher positive disconfirmation produces higher satisfaction whereas higher negative disconfirmation
generates higher dissatisfaction (Cadotte, Woodruff, & Jenkins, 1987; McCollough, Berry, & Yadav, 2000; Oliver,
1993).

Recovery Disconfirmation:

Recently, researchers have extended the research focus from initial satisfaction to post- recovery satisfaction
(Kucukarslan & Nadkarni, 2008; Smith & Bolton, 1998; Tax et al., 1998). Service recovery initiatives refer to
10
methods used by firms to alleviate a dissatisfactory consumption experience after a service failure (Gustafsson,
2009). Despite these new efforts, the impact of service recovery on satisfaction/dissatisfaction is still under
researched (Andreassen & Lindestad, 1998; Fisk, Brown, & Bitner, 1993; Singh & Widing, 1991; Tax et al., 1998).
Therefore, recovery disconfirmation is integrated with initial disconfirmation in the conceptual model. Both
disconfirmations are expected to influence customer satisfaction after a service failure.

Recovery disconfirmation refers to the discrepancy between recovery expectations (a consumer‘s expectations in
regard to what the service provider will offer in order to recover from the failure) and recovery performance (a
consumer‘s perception of the actions that taken by the service provider in response to the failure) (McCollough
et al., 2000).Previous research has found that service recovery expectations influence disconfirmation and post-
recovery satisfaction (Andreassen & Lindestad, 1998).

Consumers form recovery expectations when a service failure occurs. They expect service providers to take
certain actions in response to the failure even if they fail to file complaints. This type of expectation is called
recovery expectation, which is different from the expectation generated before being served. When recovery
expectation exceeds recovery performance, then a negative recovery disconfirmation occurs, which results in
post-recovery dissatisfaction. When recovery performance is higher than recovery expectation, then a positive
recovery disconfirmation occurs, which results in post-recovery satisfaction.

The link between expectations, perceived quality (or perceived performance), the confirmation/disconfirmation
of expectations, and satisfaction with a range of individual experiences including life satisfaction, job satisfaction,
consumer satisfaction, and so forth has a long history in the academic literature (Campbell et al. 1976; Oliver
1980; Spector 1956). Pre-experience expectations, viewed as an initial referent against which actual experiences
are compared during the formation of the individual‘s satisfaction judgments, have thus assumed a central role
in research on satisfaction in these and related areas. Likewise, the interaction between theory building and
model testing of the expectations–disconfirmation–satisfaction relationship has resulted in the refinement of this
model over time (Anderson and Sullivan 1993; Oliver 1980, 1997).

The cognitive processes are hypothesized to begin, obviously enough, with the individual‘s prior expectations
regarding the experience in question. These prior expectations are thought to impact (both directly and
indirectly) a range of consequent perceptions. First, in the aggregate, prior expectations of an experience should
positively influence post-experience perceived performance .Expectations are formed from previous comparable
experiences, first and foremost, but also through word-of-mouth, advertising, media influences, and so forth and
because individuals are generally rational and often have long experience (even if only general experience) with

11
the good or service they are experiencing, there should be a relatively small gap between what is expected and
actual performance, where high expectations result in strong perceived performance and vice versa.

On the other hand, in the model prior expectations should negatively influence dis-confirmation of
expectations .That is, the individual‘s expectations can be high, middling (average), or low, and those with higher
expectations are, ceterisparibus, more likely to have those expectations negatively disconfirmed (i.e., where
performance fails to live-up to expectations). For similar reasons, those with low expectations are predicted to be
more likely to have their expectations positively disconfirmed, whereas average expectations are more likely to
be confirmed. Regarding performance, perceived performance should positively influence disconfirmation of
expectations. That is, strong perceived performance will more likely lead to positive disconfirmation of
expectations, all else being equal, whereas poor perceived performance will lead to negative disconfirmation of
expectations.

Satisfaction:

Satisfaction is a reflection of post-purchase evaluation. It is well-documented that customer satisfaction

influences repurchase intentions, loyalty and post-purchase behaviors, such as word- of-mouth advertising,
switching and complaining (Anderson & Sullivan, 1993; Gladwell, 2000; Jones & Sasser, 1995; Kim, Park, & Jeong,
2004; Szymanski Henard, 2001). Satisfied customers are more likely to repurchase, engaging in positive word-of-
mouth advertising and become loyal customers, whereas dissatisfied customers are more likely to engage in
negative word-of-mouth advertising, make complaints to others or third parties and switch to competitors
(Gladwell, 2000).

Customer satisfaction is also considered an indicator of switching intentions (Jones, Mothersbaugh, & Beatty,
2000; Ping, 1994). Customer satisfaction increases the customer retention rate (Ranaweera & Prabhu, 2003;
Rene, Art, & Russell, 2009) but negatively influencing switching intentions (Ganesh, Arnold, & Reynolds, 2000). It
is expected that after experiencing a service failure, dissatisfied customers are more likely to generate higher
switching intentions than satisfied customers. Customers‘ satisfaction and future loyalty is dependent on
customers‘ feelings on whether they have been treated fairly or not. Customers expect a service recovery to be
fair in order to recover their satisfaction and loyalty. The effects of perceived justice with service recovery and
customer satisfaction has stated by a number of researchers.

Zemke (1993) states the objective of service recovery efforts is to move a customer from a state of dissatisfaction
to a state of satisfaction. Wirtz and Mattila (2004) indicate that recovery outcomes (e.g. compensation),
procedures (e.g. speed of recovery) and interactional treatment (e.g. apology) have a joint effect on post-
12
recovery satisfaction. The effect of perceived justice dimensions on recovery satisfaction also has been
mentioned in past literature.

Even the most customer-oriented organization with the strongest quality program is unlikely to be able to
eliminate all service failures (del Río-Lanza, 2009). Service failure causes customer dissatisfaction with the service
provider, and due to that customers may exit silently, spread a negative word-of-mouth, voice their complaints
to the operator, or continue to patronage the same service provider despite their dissatisfaction (Kim et al.,
2009). Therefore, service recovery is a moment of truth for the company, which is critical for satisfying its
customers as well as strengthening its relationships with them (Blodgett et al., 1997).

Switching Intention:

The switching of consumer intentions refers to customers rejecting a product or service in favor of a
competitor's. For example, a customer might never return back for second time purchase if he is dissatisfied with
the customer service the first time. Consumer switching intention presents danger for a business. If retailers do
not keep their customer satisfied, competitors might directly benefit (Kim, 2012). Ping (1993) and Zeithaml, and
Berry (1996) defined customer‘s switching intention is customer‘s strong emotional reaction and relationship
dissolution, whereas other behaviors create a predisposition to switch.

Athanassopoulos, Gounaris, and Stathakopoulos investigated switching intentions from views of customer
satisfaction, and explored the Greek banking service industry. Their research found customer switching intention
factors as follows: service quality, price, convenience, innovation and customer satisfaction. Ganesh et al. [8]
argued in customer switching intention factors, customers using the products or services generated by the Post-
purchase evaluation; will directly affect the switching intention of customer intent. Post- purchase evaluation is
reflected in the satisfaction with the product and brand identity.

But sometimes the influence of social environment than a personal attitude; in addition, individual willpower, if
weak, is likely to make external factors that interfere with personal intentions. Switching intentions refers to the
termination of the relationship between the customer and vendor (Bansal, Irving, & Taylor, 2004). Switching
intention can be defined as anger incidents; primarily it occurs when

A service failure occurs when services or products provided by companies do not meet customers‘ needs or
standards (Zheng, 1997). The customer determines that something is wrong and uncomfortable (McMullan,
2000). Even under the high standard requirement, even when the Service provider performed without error,

13
customers would react and complain, alleging service provider mistakes (Wu, 2002). Service failure is service
performance "below customers‘ expectations or tolerance range" (Holloway and Beatty, 2003) as a definition.

These mistakes will cause the enterprise the loss of customers or increase negative reviews, as well as service
failure is one of the major factors contributing to customers switching intention (McCollough et al, 2000). In such
a case, making the appropriate service remedy to soothe customers‘ emotions, remedying for service failures
which caused relationship rifts becomes a very important issue (Zho, 2004; Wu, 2002). Therefore, actively
minimizing service failures is the long -term business operating method. That is, not only should remedy be taken
to improve service errors, more importantly, business strategy should include that "prevention is better than
cure", including staff training and the establishment of a customer feedback system (Ling, 2004).

Because the service industry deals with intangibility, inseparability, variability and heterogeneity, in the process
of providing services it is impossible to achieve zero error (Panda, 2014; Fuentes, 2012). Priluck (2003)
considered that customers dissatisfied with service providers may terminate the business transaction, or provide
negative reviews (Chang, 2015), both of which cause damage to the enterprise.

Customer satisfaction is also considered an indicator of switching intentions (Jones, Mothersbaugh, & Beatty,
2000; Ping, 1994). Customer satisfaction increases the customer retention rate (Ranaweera & Prabhu, 2003;
Rene, Art, & Russell, 2009) but negatively influencing switching intentions (Ganesh, Arnold, & Reynolds, 2000). It
is expected that after experiencing a service failure, dissatisfied customers are more likely to generate higher
switching intentions than satisfied customers.

In addition to satisfaction, customers‘ perceptions of switching costs also influence their switching intentions
(Ganesh et al., 2000). Researchers have demonstrated a negative relationship between switching costs and
switching intentions in the service industry (Fornell, 1992; Jones et al., 2000; Zhang, Lee, Cheung, & Chen, 2009).
Switching costs refer to the time, efforts and money involved in switching to a new service provider (Dwyer &
Tanner, 2002; Heide & Weiss, 1995; Lee & Cunningham, 2001).These costs include economic costs as well as
psychological and physical efforts and time. Further, during the switching process, customers may have to give
up investments that were already made and face economic punishment. Fornell (1992) indicated that as
switching costs, such as time, money and efforts increase, customers are more likely to perceive that they are
locked in‘ to the service provider and less likely to switch a competitor. Further, Zhang et al. (2009) found that
bloggers‘ perceptions of switching costs negatively influenced their intentions to switch to other blog service
providers.

14
Therefore, it is expected that as switching costs increase, customer switching intentions decrease and vice versa.
When customers are dissatisfied with their service provider after a service failure, they are very likely to switch to
another service provider. However, sometimes dissatisfied customers stay with their current service providers.
This result can be explained via switching costs. Jones et al. (2000) found that perceived switching costs
moderated the effect of core- service satisfaction on repurchase indentations. When perceived switching costs
increase the relationship between core-service satisfactions and repurchase intentions decreases. Switching
costs are considered to be an efficient managerial tool by which to enhance consumer retention (Chebat & Ben-
Amor, 2010).

Economic models of consumer behavior indicate that consumers consider both the costs and benefits of a
switching decision (Hauser & Wernerfelt, 1990). As perceived switching costs increase, they eventually outweigh
the perceived benefits. Thus, when perceived switching costs are high, customers may stay with a service
provider even though they are not satisfied with the service (Jones et al., 2000). Switching barriers were found to
positively influence customer retention and moderate the relationship between satisfaction and customer
retention (Ranaweera & Prabhu, 2003).

On the other hand, researchers have also suggested that switching costs and satisfaction may negatively interact
with each other in driving customer switching intentions (Burnham et al., 2003; Jones & Sasser, 1995; Jones et
al., 2000; Oliva, Oliver, & MacMillan, 1992). Similarly, Zhang et al. (2009) also showed that bloggers‘switching
costs moderated the effect of satisfaction on switching intentions to other blog service providers. Thus, it is
anticipated that the negative effect of satisfaction on switching intentions will be stronger when the switching
costs are lower and that the negative effect of satisfaction will be weaker when the switching costs are higher.

15
 Research Model

Research Questions and Hypothesis:

Q1: Is there any Relationship between Initial Disconfirmation and Switching Intention?

Null Ho 1: There is No relationship between Initial Disconfirmation and Switching Intention.

Alternative Ha: There is a Relationship between Initial Disconfirmation and Switching Intention.

Q2: Is there any Relationship between Recovery disconfirmation and Switching Intention?

Null Ho: There is no Relationship between Recovery disconfirmation and Switching Intention.

Alternative Ha: There is Relationship between Recovery disconfirmation and Switching Intention.

Q 03: Is there any Relationship between Satisfaction and Switching Intention?

Null Ho: There is no Relationship between Satisfaction and Switching Intention.

Alternative Ha: There is Relationship between Satisfaction and Switching Intention.

16
Research Design/ Methodology
This research is a causal research because this will help the decision makers know the effect Service Recovery
on Initial Disconfirmation, Recovery Disconfirmation, Satisfaction and Customer Switching Intension in E-
Business Context. In my research I will explain the relationship among the variables. Both Primary & Secondary
data will be collected for this research. Primary data will be collected through survey. Secondary data will be
collected from different articles, internet, different research books, journals, Wikipedia and some statistics etc. I
will use convenience sampling as this is low cost and extensively used and also popular mostly for research. I will
choose customers who are engaged in online transaction (E-business Company) and the sample will be 100 units.
Moreover, I expect to take around 2 months to complete the survey.

Data Analysis and Expected Outcomes

I will do Hypotheses testing by Regression analysis and strata. Graphical analysis will be used for data
representation. This business research is all about service recovery. From this research a business can understand
how service recovery has to provide when the service has failed and customers intend to switch in e-business.
My research study will be based on the context of e-business service failure, recovery and customers switching
intension. So it will help to analyze the impact of a service failure on customer switching intension in the e-
business. The result of this study will expose the importance and impact of service failure and recovery in E-
business in Bangladesh. Everyone will be able to know how to provide an excellent service recovery in e-business
context when service fails and their customers are intend to switch.

Limitations of the study:

• We may realize later that sample size selected is not sufficient it may be difficult to collect enough
information.

• The research study may consume more time than expected

• Some of the respondents might not cooperate with us.

• Some respondents may think that it‘s waste of time.

• Possibility of getting biased information from respondents

• Some respondents may tick the questionnaire even without reading. In such case we will face difficulty
analyzing the data.

17
Research Schedule/Timeline
The entire research will take around 6 month to complete. I will start the research on 1 st October/21 and will end
by 30th March’22.

Conclusion
Business research is vital in business world. Business research is a successful instrument to aid business
arranging. It is tied in with gathering data that gives knowledge into clients thinking, purchasing behaviors, and
area. Likewise, statistical surveying can likewise help us to screen market patterns and watch out for what our
opposition is doing. This business research is about service recovery. From this examination a business can see
how service recovery needs to be given when the assistance has fizzled and clients plan to switch in e-business.
My study will be founded on the setting of e-business service failure, recuperation and clients switching
intension. So it will assist with analyzing the effect of a service failure on customer switching intension in the e-
business. The aftereffect of this examination will uncover the significance and effect of service failure and
recovery in E-business in Bangladesh.. Everybody will actually want to realize how to offer a brilliant support
recuperation in e-business setting when administration falls flat and their clients are expect to switch.

18
References
• Andreassen, T.W., & Lindestad, B. (1998). Customer loyalty and complex services the impact of corporate
image on quality, customer satisfaction and loyalty for customers with varying degrees of service
expertise. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 9(1), 7–23.
• Anderson, E.W., & Sullivan, M.W. (1993). The antecedents and consequences of customer satisfaction for
firms. Marketing Science, 12(2), 125–143
• Anderson, J. and Narus, J. (1984), ―A model of the distributor‘s perspective of distributor
manufacturer working relationships‖, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 48, Fall, pp. 62-74.
• Anderson, J.C and Gerbeing, D.W (1988), ―Structural equation Modeling in Practice: A Review and
Recommended Two-Step Approach‖, Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), pp.411-423.
• Analysis for Marketing, Vol. 12, No. 3, pp. 256-268. Lam, S.Y., Shankar, V., Erramilli,
• M.K. and Murthy, B. (2004), ―Customer value, satisfaction, loyalty, and switching costs: An illustration
from a business-to-business service context‖.
• Athanassopoulos, A., S. Gounaris, and V.Stathakopoulos (2001), "Behavioral Responses to Customer
Satisfaction: An Empirical Study", European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 35, pp. 687-707.
• Boshoff and Staude, 2003.What is service recovery and why it is important for the long term success of
the companies?. https://www.scribd.com/doc/35631427/What-is-Service- Recovery-and-Why-is-It-
Important-for-the-Long-2
• Bitner, M.J., Booms, B.H., & Mohr, L.A. (1994). Critical service encounter: The employee‘s viewpoint.
Journal of Marketing, 58(5), 95–106.
• Bitner, M.J., Booms, B.H., & Tetreault, M.S. (1990). The service encounter: Diagnosing favorable and
unfavorable incidents. Journal of Marketing, 54(1), 71–84.
• T.O., & Sasser, W.E., Jr. (1995). Why satisfied customer defect. Harvard Business Review, 73(6), 88–99.
• Blodgett, J. G., Hill, D. J., & Tax, S. S. (1997). The effects of distributive, procedural, and interactional
justice on post-complaint behavior. Journal of Retailing, 73(2), 185-210.
• Boulding, W., Kalra, A., Staelin, R., & Zeithaml, V.A. (1993). A dynamic process model of service quality:
From expectations to behavioral intentions. Journal of Marketing Research, 30, 7-27.
• Bitner, M. J. (1993). Managing the evidence of service. In Scheuing, E.E., Christopher,
• W.F. (Eds),The Service Quality Handbook, American Management Association (AMACOM), New York, NY,
358-70.
• Blodgett, J. G., Hill, D. J., & Tax, S. S. (1997). The effects of distributive, procedural, and interactional
justice on post-complaint behavior. Journal of Retailing, 73(2), 185-210.

19
• Bitner, M. J. (1993). Managing the evidence of service. In Scheduling, E.E., Christopher,
• W.F. (Eds), The Service Quality Handbook, American Management Association (AMACOM), New York, NY,
358-70.
• Bitner, M., Booms, B. and Tetreault, M. (1990), ―The service encounter: diagnosing favourable and
unfavourable incidents‖, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 54, January, pp. 71- 84.
• Bell, C.R. (1994), ―Turning disappointment into customer delight‖, Editor and Publisher, Vol. 127, No.32,
pp. 48-49.
• Brown, S.W. and Swartz, T.A. (1989), ―A gap analysis of professional services quality‖, Journal of
Marketing, Vol. 53, No.2, pp. 42-7.
• Brockner, J., Tyler, R., & Cooper-Schneider, R. (1992). The influence of prior commitment to an institution
on reactions to perceived unfairness: The higher they are, they harder they fall. Administrative Science
Quarterly, 37, 241-261.
• Brockner, J., Tyler, R., & Cooper-Schneider, R. (1992). The influence of prior commitment to an institution
on reactions to perceived unfairness: The higher they are, they harder they fall. Administrative Science
Quarterly, 37, 241-261.
• Bhandari, M.S., Tsarenko, Y., & Polonsk, M.J. (2007). A proposed multi-dimensional approach to
evaluating service recovery. Journal of Services Marketing, 21(3), 174–185.
• Blodgett, J., Hill, D. and Tax, S. (1997), ―The effects of distributive, procedural, and interactional
justice on postcomplaint behaviour‖, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 73, No. 2, pp. 185-210.
• Bozzo, C. (2002), ―Understanding inertia in an industrial context‖, Journal of Customer Behaviour, Vol. 1,
pp. 335-355.
• Burnham, T.A., Frels, J.K., and Mahajan, V. (2003), ―Consumer switching costs: A typology,
antecedents, and consequences‖, Journal of the Academy of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 31,
No. 2, pp. 109-126.
• Beerli, A., Martin, J.D. and Quintana, A. (2004), ―A model of customer loyalty in the retail banking
market‖, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 38, No. 1/2, pp. 253-275.
• Bitner, M.J., Booms, B.H., & Mohr, L.A. (1994). Critical service encounter: The employee‘s viewpoint.
Journal of Marketing, 58(5), 95–106.
• Bitner, M.J., Booms, B.H., & Tetreault, M.S. (1990). The service encounter: Diagnosing favorable and
unfavorable incidents. Journal of Marketing, 54(1), 71–84.
• Carlzon, J. (1987). Moments of truth. New York, NY: Bellinger Publishing Company. Reichheld, F.F., &
Sasser, W.E., Jr. (1990). Zero defections: Quality to services. Harvard Business Review, 68(5), 105–111.

20
• Chang, K. (2015). How travel agency reputation creates recommendation behavior. Industrial
Management & Data Systems, 115(2), 332-352.
• Caruana, A. (2004), ―The impact of switching costs on customer loyalty: A study among corporate
customers of mobile telephony‖, Journal of Targeting, Measurement and
• Chebat, J. C., & 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(5), 664-73.
• Cadotte, E.R., Woodruff, R.B., & Jenkins, R.L. (1987). Expectations and norms in models of consumer
satisfaction. Journal of Marketing Research, 24(3), 305–314.
• Churchill, G.A., Jr., & Surprenant, C. (1982). An investigation into the determinants of consumer
satisfaction. Journal of Marketing Research, 19(4), 491–504.
• Clemmer, E. C., & Schneider, B. (1996). Fair service. In T. A. Swartz, D. E. Bowen, &
• S. W. Brown (Eds.),Advances in services marketing and management (pp. 109–126). Greenwich, CT: JAI
Press.
• Cox, D.F. (1967), Risk taking and information handling in consumer behaviour, Graduate School of
Business Administration, Harvard.
• Colgate, M. and Norris, M. (2001), ―Developing a comprehensive picture of service failure‖,
International Journal of Service Industry Management, Vol 12, No. 3/4, pp. 215- 34.
• Chang, C. 2006. ―When Service Fails: The Role of the Salesperson and the Customer.‖ Psychology &
Marketing 23: 203-224.
• Casado.A, Nicolau.J and Mas.F (2011) ―The harm full consequence of failed recoveries in the banking
industry‖, International Journal of Banking, Vol 29 No1, p.32-49.
• Clark, M.S., & Mills, J. (1993). The difference between communal and exchange relationships: What it is
and is not. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 19, 684- 691.
• Chebat, J.C., & Ben-Amor, K. (2010). Switching costs‘emotional effects on dissatisfied
customers‘behavior. Retrieved September 6, 2010, from http://www.capco.com/?
q=content/journaldetail& sid=63
• Cohen, J., & Cohen, P. (1975). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral
sciences. NJ: John Wiley & Sons
• Danaher, P. J., & Mattsson, J. (1994). Customer satisfaction during the service delivery process. European
Journal of Marketing, 28, 5 16.
• de Ruyter, K., & Wetzels, M. (2000). Customer equity considerations in service recovery: A cross-industry
perspective. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 11, 91-108.

21
• Davidow, M. (2000). The bottom line impact of organizational responses to customer complaints. Journal
of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 24(4), 473–490.
• Davidow, M. (2003). Organizational responses to customer complaints: what works and what doesn‘t?
Journal of Service Research, 5(3), 225-50
• Fisher, A., (2001), Winning the battle for customers‖, Journal of Financial Services Marketing, 6(2), pp.77-
83. Bridgewater, S., (2001), ―Virgin direct 2000: Market oriented
• personal financial services‖, in Jobber, D., (Ed.,) Principles and Practice of Marketing, 3rd ed.,
• Gronhaug, K. And Gilly, M. (1991), ―A transaction cost approach to consumer dissatisfaction
and complaint actions‖, Journal of Economic Psychology, Vol. 12, pp. 165-83.
• Gremler, D.D. (1995), ―The impact of satisfaction, switching costs and interpersonal bonds on service
loyalty‖, PhD Dissertation, Arizona State University.
• Gremler, D.D. and Brown, S.W. (1996), ―Service loyalty; it‘s nature, importance and implications:, In
Edvardsson, B., Brown, S.W., Johnston, R. and Scheuing, E. (Eds), QUIS V: Advancing Service Quality: A
Global Perspective, ISQA, New York, pp. 171- 81..
• Ganesh, J., Arnold, M.J., & Reynolds, K.E. (2000). Understanding the customer base of service providers:
An examination of the differences between switchers and stayers. Journal of Marketing, 64(3), 65–87.
• Gronroos, C. (1988). Service Quality: The Six Criteria of Good Perceived Service Quality. Review of
Business [St John‘s University], 9(3), 10-13.
• Gronroos, C. (1990), ―Relationship approach to the marketing functions in service contexts‖,
Journal of Business Research, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp. 3-12.
• Goodwin, C., & Gremler, D.D. (1996). Friendship over the counter: How social aspects of the service
encounters inß uence consumer service loyalty. Advances in Services Marketing and Management, 5,
247-282. Blau, P. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. New York: Wiley.
• Gladwell, M. (2000). The tipping point. Newton, MA: Little Brown & Co. Jones, T.O., & Sasser, W.E., Jr.
(1995). Why satisfied customer defect. Harvard Business Review, 73(6), 88–99.
• Gustafsson, A. (2009). Customer satisfaction with service recovery. Journal of Business Research, 62(11),
1220–1222.
• Ganesh, J., Mark, J. A. & Kristy, E. R. (2000). Understanding the Customer Base of Service Providers: An
Examination of the Differences between Switchers and Stayers. Journal of Marketing, July, 65-87.

22
Appendices

Questionnaire:

This Research is conducted for Academic purpose only. So, please do not hesitate to
answer. Your information will be kept confidential.

Section 1
(Independent Variable)
Using the flowing scale, please circle the number that best describes your organization:

1 = Strongly Disagree

2 = Somewhat Disagree
3 = Neither Agree Nor Disagree
4 = Somewhat Agree
5 = Strongly Agree

Initial disconfirmation
1 The E-business service company‘s reliability was about 1 2 3 4 5
what I expected
2 The E-business service company‘s one-time performance 1 2 3 4 5
was much better than I expected
3 E-business company Daraz makes items available for 1 2 3 4 5
delivery within a suitable time frame
4 Daraz is truthful about what they offering 1 2 3 4 5

Recovery disconfirmation

23
1 I expect the E-business service company would do 1 2 3 4 5
more in response to the service failure
2 The compensation for my problem was much better 1 2 3 4 5
than I expected the E-business service company
would
provide
3 After reading the E-business service company‘s posted 1 2 3 4 5
policy, I expected the company would do more for me
Satisfaction
1 Overall, how satisfied or dissatisfied did this experience 1 2 3 4 5
leave you feeling?
2 How well did this service experience meet your needs? 1 2 3 4 5

3 Overall, How well did you satisfied with this experience? 1 2 3 4 5

24
 Section 2

(Dependent Variable)

Switching intentions
1 In the near future I intend to intensify my efforts to find a 1 2 3 4 5
better E-business service company
2 In the last year I have considered seriously switch to 1 2 3 4 5
other E-business service companies
3 I have decided to do less business with the E-business 1 2 3 4 5
service company in the future
4 I think other E-business service companies can offer 1 2 3 4 5
better service

Section 3 (Demographic part)

Please circle the section that represents the appropriate response the following items:
1. Your education level
A. PhD Degree
B. Master‘s Degree
C. Bachelor Degree
D. Diploma
E. Others. Please Specify

2. Your sex
A. Male
B. Female

25
3. Your age
A. Less than 25
B. 25-35
C. 36-45
D. 46-50
E. Above 50

4. Buying Period
A. Regularly
B. Once a week Occasio

26
27