- Email: [email protected]
Passenger complaints under irregular airline conditions – cross-cultural study
Journal of Air Transport Management 15 (2009) 350–353
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Journal of Air Transport Management journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jairtraman
Note
Passenger complaints under irregular airline conditions – cross-cultural study Yu-Kyoung Kim, Hyung-Ryong Lee* Department of Hospitality and Tourism Management, Sejong University, Seoul 143-747, Republic of Korea
a b s t r a c t Keywords: Irregular airline condition Complaining behavior Cross-cultural attitudes
Punctuality is seen as key component of airline service quality. This paper examines cross-cultural differences in passenger complaints regarding irregular airline conditions. Analysis of four clusters of air travelers in South Korea – from South Korea, Japan, China, and America – exhibit significantly differences in their attitudes suggestion important cultural variations. Ó 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction Punctual, predictable flight schedules can be an important factor for the success of an airline, affecting its competitiveness, productivity, customer satisfaction, and loyalty. Irregular airline conditions (IACs), usually associated with severe weather patterns, unexpected aircraft problems or airport failures can mitigate against punctuality. In general, dissatisfaction after using the products or service is the primary reason for complaints and IACs are reportedly the most common source of passenger complaints. Moreover, Hofstede (2001) demonstrated that a person’s willingness to complain about inferior service may depend upon that person’s cultural upbringing. The subject of this paper is to determine the relationship between nationality and passenger behavior.
2. Background Air transport punctuality, along with scheduling, food quality, cost, frequency, baggage delivery, cabin service, and membership of airline alliances are usually seem as the main elements of customer service (Weber and Sparks, 2004). Several IACs can occur during the flight, including delays, cancellations and diversions. Although their causes are often apparent, they can affect the image of an airline and its costs. The European Union (EU) experts’ group suggested that an unnecessary financial burden is placed on airlines and passengers that amounts to $4.4 billion annually because of air traffic control problems (Portfolio, 25 Feb 2008). It has also been reported that flight delays cause a remarkable decrease in costcompetitiveness in airline markets (Forbes, 2008).
* Corresponding author. Tel.: þ82 2 3408 3717. E-mail address: [email protected] (H.-R. Lee). 0969-6997/$ – see front matter Ó 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.jairtraman.2008.11.007
IACs are related to service failure, which occurs when a relatively implicit promise with regard to specified time of a service is violated (Casado Diaz and Mas Ruiz, 2002). Such failures can lead to wasted labor, product disqualification, lowered customer satisfaction, and damaged reputation of the firms involved (Tobias, 1999). Dissatisfaction with a product or other aspect of service exchange caused by failure is the primary reason for complaints. Specifically, feelings or emotions of perceived dissatisfaction are thought to trigger consumer complaint (Day, 1984). The benefits of complaining are that it allows dissatisfied consumers to vent their unhappiness, and can results in a more positive attitude regarding future repurchasing intentions (Nyer, 2000). A negative aspect, however, can be the ineffective handling of customers’ complaints, which reinforces negative consumer reactions (Mattila, 2000). Following a service failure, customers can complain in various ways. Singh (1990) found that consumers communicate their dissatisfaction in one of three ways. Voice responses occur when individuals seek compensation directly from the service provider. Private responses are when individuals engage in word-of-mouth communication with others regarding their unhappy experiences with others. Third-party responses occur when individuals involve an outside party to compensate for their dissatisfaction. Several studies have demonstrated that passengers from different cultures vary in their perceptions of service quality (Sultan and Simpson, 2000). Culture is fairly stable over time and is complex, encompassing the knowledge, belief, art, morals, customs, and other capabilities and habits of a society (Hofstede and Usunier, 1999). Discussions of cultural distance are mainly couched in terms of power distance, masculinity–femininity, uncertainty avoidance, individualism–collectivism, and long-term orientation. Consumers from collectivist nations tend to refrain from verbal responses for fear of losing face, but they are more likely to tell family members and friends about a bad service. Conversely, in
Y.-K. Kim, H.-R. Lee / Journal of Air Transport Management 15 (2009) 350–353 Table 1 Comparison of Hofstede’s original score of four divisions and ranking among countries. Country
PDI
IDV
UAI
LTO
South Korea U.S China Japan Average
60 40 80 54 57
18 91 20 46 43
85 46 30 92 65
75 29 118 80 45
PDI: Power Distance Index, IDV: Individualism Index, UAI: Uncertainty Avoidance Index, LTO: Long-term orientation Index.
individualistic nations, customers are likely to complain to the company as well as to a third-party (Liu and McClure, 2001). Bejou et al. (1996) found that Americans complain more, enjoy complaining, and seek quality improvement for the future whereas Chinese people are likely to engage in private complaint, and to refrain from repurchasing (Ngai et al., 2007). Singh (1990) identified that complainers typically tend to have more education, to work in more professional careers, and to be younger, and suggests that the more the consumer perceived the value of complaining, the greater the tendency to engage in voice responses.
351
Table 3 Demographic characteristics. Demographic characteristics
Country
Total
S. Korean US Chinese Japanese n ¼ 431 n ¼ 128 n ¼ 113 n ¼ 100 n ¼ 90 Gender Male Female
61 67
73 40
51 49
24 66
209 222
Previous experience 1–5 flights 6–10 flights 11–15 flights 16–20 flights 21 flights more
71 19 11 11 16
23 20 9 10 51
14 14 18 26 28
16 23 4 7 40
124 76 42 54 135
Age 24 years or younger 25–34 35–44 45–54 55 years or older
37 36 28 15 12
42 24 27 9 11
14 32 29 16 9
21 40 17 6 6
114 132 101 46 38
Education Completed high school Some college/university Completed university degree Completed postgraduate degree
38 10 51 29
9 34 52 18
27 64 9 0
13 25 46 6
87 133 158 53
3. Methodology Data were collected in South Korea after a pilot test. Surveys were conducted at the departure hall of Incheon International Airport, South Korea with the assistance of trained interviewers during July 2007. The targets were South Korean, Japanese, Chinese, and US passengers who had had an IAC experience in the past. The respondents were selected at random, and they participated at different times over the course of the study. Six hundred passengers who were dissatisfied with IACs were asked to fill out a survey regarding their previous experience. Incomplete responses led to exclusion of 9% of the 476 who accepted, giving 431 usable questionnaires. Japanese, Chinese and US passengers were chosen as the non-local travelers because, first, according to Hofstede’ (Table 1), these three groups have considerably different cultures, and second, passengers from these nations represented approximately 60% of all foreign inbound passengers (Table 2). Consistent with previous research on complaint behavior, the measures were taken or adapted from previous studies. The scales were developed by Singh (1988), and are one the most methods used for examining complaint behavior. Three aspects of complaint behavior were assessed: voice responses (four items), private responses (four items) and third-party responses (three items). The survey was composed of 16 questions, and it was available in four languages. Respondents were first asked to remember their previous IAC experiences. Next, participants were asked about their complaint behavior regarding IACs. Third, the respondents were asked about their demographic information. All responses were ranked on a Likert-type scale with options from ‘1 ¼ very low’ to ‘5 ¼ very high.’
The frequency distribution of the variables was used in order to identify the profile of the respondents and to compute the means and standard deviations for each complaint behavior variable. A series of one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) tests and Duncan’s multiple range tests was undertaken to examine which of the nationality group means were significantly different from each other.
Table 2 Monthly travelers entering South Korea.
2008.1 2007.1 2006.1 2005.1 2004.1 2003.1 2002.1 2001.1
Japan
China
US
Others
Total
153,122 170,473 154,652 197,632 145,221 155,546 155,375 163,877
80,677 56,885 55,280 44,948 54,966 35,851 33,783 42,890
40,734 38,585 34,473 34,769 31,817 30,213 29,235 31,754
210,536 170,518 188,874 180,972 241,166 163,308 143,911 159,574
485,069 436,461 433,279 458,321 423,670 384,918 362,304 398,095
South Korea Tourism Organization (January 2001–January 2008).
4. Results Table 3 summarizes the demographic characteristics of the sample from the four countries. Thirty percent of the respondents were South Korean, 21% were Japanese, 23% were Chinese, and 26% American. Principal component analysis was utilized to examine the dimensions underlying the complaint behavior with varimax rotation. Using factor analyses, one complaint behavior indicator (Forget about it and do nothing) was removed due to its reliability. The 10 items for the complaint behavior yielded three factors with eigen values greater than 1.0 and 63.4% of the variance. All Table 4 Factor analysis of complaining behavior (N ¼ 431). Items (Reliability)
Loading
I. Voice responses (.75) Discuss with airline manager or other employee Ask the firm to take care of the problem Inform the firm
0.80 0.80 0.79
II. Private responses (.76) Convince your friends and relatives not to use Buy from another airline Avoid boarding with the firm from then on Speak it to your friends and relatives
0.83 0.82 0.81 0.55
III. Third-party responses (.66) Take legal action against the firm Write a letter to the local newspaper about your bad experience Report the problem to a consumer agency
0.78 0.70
Eigen value
Variance (%)
3.28
31.4
2.29
21.6
1.10
10.4
0.51
Total variance explained: .74 KMO (Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy) ¼ .783.
352
Y.-K. Kim, H.-R. Lee / Journal of Air Transport Management 15 (2009) 350–353
coefficient alpha values were high, ranging from 0.66 to 0.76 for three component of complaint behavior (Table 4). One-way ANOVA tests showed significant differences in 9 out of 10 complaint behaviors among the four nations (Table 5). As for ‘voice responses’, the complaint behaviors of the four countries’ participants segmented broadly into two groups. Chinese and US passengers scored higher than South Korean and Japanese passengers. This result is interesting because China is often grouped together with South Korea and Japan with respect to culture, and it has been previously reported that the Chinese were not likely to engage in voice response complaining (Ngai et al., 2007). Chinese passengers showed an even higher score than US passengers, who are considered the most individualistic. This means that Chinese passengers perceive IACs seriously and have a lower uncertainty avoidance, which affects decision-making, especially when related to risk-taking (Bouter et al., 2000). The analysis of items in the ‘private responses’ section showed significant differences among the four nationalities. Generally Japanese and US passengers are more likely to engage in private responses. Interestingly, Chinese passengers showed a lesser tendency to respond privately, which was completely contrary to the ‘voice response’ results. These results are partly explained by the fact that Japanese passengers are generally collectivists and tend not to express their emotions outwardly, especially negative emotions, which is considered a way of losing face (Cavusgil and Kaynak, 1982). As for US passengers, they seem to be active not only
in voice responses but also in private responses, and this is expected considering the high value of customer satisfaction in the American culture. In contrast to ‘private responses,’ Chinese passengers are most likely to engage in ‘third-party responses’, including taking legal action. In contrast, Japanese passengers tend not to complain of IACs to a third-party. US passengers and Korean passengers are moderately active in ‘third-party response’, but they have a low
Voice response
0.5 China
-1
U.S -0.5
I. Voice responses 1. Discuss with airline manager Mean Score or other employee Duncan’s test P Mean Score 2. Ask the airline to take Duncan’s test care of the problem P
6. Buy from another airline
7. Speak to your friends and relatives about your bad experience 8. Convince your friends and relatives not to do business with that airline III. Third-party responses 9. Write a letter to the local newspaper about your bad experience 10. Report the problem to a consumer agency 11. Take legal action against the airline
1
Korea
-0.5
-1
Private response
3.60 3.72 H H
Mean Score 2.84 Duncan’s test L P 0.000
3.94 3.82 H H
2.77 L
Mean Score Duncan’s test P Mean Score Duncan’s test P Mean Score Duncan’s test P Mean Score Duncan’s test P
3.17 2.90 – –
3.07 –
3.79 3.37 H L
3.37 L
4.32 3.23 H L
4.32 H
3.46 2.89 H L
3.20 H
3.05 – 0.324 3.41 L 0.003 4.01 M 0.000 3.45 H 0.000
1
Chinese Japanese
2.57 L 0.000 3.23 M 0.000
(e. g. to replace aircraft or return your money)
II. Private responses 5. Avoid boarding with the airline from then on
0.5
Country S. Korean US
3. Inform the airline so that they will do better in the future
Japan
II
Table 5 ANOVA comparison of complaining behavior on IAC by passenger’s county. Items
I
1
2.49 L
0.5 Japan
3.90 4.00 H H
2.80 L
I
Korea
China
II -1
-0.5
0.5
-0.5
U.S
-1
Third-party response
1
I
0.5 Japan
Mean Score Duncan’s test P Mean Score Duncan’s test P Mean Score Duncan’s test P
2.26 M 0.000 2.48 M 0.000 2.09 L 0.000
1
2.22 2.86 M H
1.87 L
3.06 3.11 H H
1.94 L
1.92 2.67 L H
2.08 L
Based on mean value on a 5 Liker-type scale (1 ¼ strongly disagree and 5 ¼ strongly agree). Duncan’s multiple range tests: means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level.
China Korea
II -1
-0.5
0.5
1
U.S -0.5
-1
Fig. 1. Complaining behavior Euclidean distance model: (A) Voice response (B) Private response (C) Third-pasty response.
Y.-K. Kim, H.-R. Lee / Journal of Air Transport Management 15 (2009) 350–353
353
Table 6 ANOVA comparison of complaining behavior on IAC by passenger’s demographic characteristics. Age
Factor I: Voice Responses Factor II: Private Responses Factor III: Third-party Responses
Mean Score Duncan’s test P Mean Score Duncan’s test P Mean Score Duncan’s test P
Education
Gender
Previous experience
<24
25–34
35–44
45–54
>55
1*
2*
3*
4*
Male
Female
1–5 flights
6–10 flights
11–15 flights
16–20 flights
21 flights or more
3.06 L 0.000 3.48 – 0.560 2.21 L 0.005
3.22 M
3.48 M
3.48 M
3.68 H
3.54 H
3.10 L
3.25 L
3.38
3.24
3.12 H
3.08 L
3.46 H
3.52 –
3.34 –
3.38 –
3.51 –
3.46 –
3.64 –
3.46
0.120 3.48
3.41 –
3.54 –
3.58 –
3.46 –
2.32 L
2.59 H
2.40 L
2.56 H
2.56 H
2.14 L
2.28 L
2.44
0.801 2.33
2.38 L
2.26 L
3.34 L 0.001 3.35 – 0.297 2.40 L 0.036
3.61 L
3.48 –
3.38 M 0.001 3.37 – 0.075 2.62 H 0.000
2.69 L
2.33 H
0.147
Based on mean value on a 5 Liker-type scale (1 ¼ strongly disagree and 5 ¼ strongly agree). Duncan’s multiple range tests: means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level. 1*: completed high school; 2*: some college/university; 3*: completed university degree; 4*: completed postgraduate degree.
tendency to take legal action as a complaint behavior. The relatively lower scores of Japanese and South Korean passengers might be explained by these two countries’ cultural backgrounds; they think ‘third-party response’ is similar to expressing negative emotions outwardly. In U.S and Chinese passengers, this study is in agreement with Huang et al.’s (1996) study, which showed that consumers in individualistic nations like the US are likely to complain to a third-party, and with Singh’s (1988) study, which demonstrated that consumers in a collectivist culture might find third-party responses more comfortable because third-party responses do not directly confront the firm. Additionally, there are remarkable differences among the complaint behaviors regarding IACs in the three collectivist, East Asian countries. As shown in Fig. 1, multidimensional scaling (MDS) was used to analyze the distance and proximity of the factors. First, the relative positions indicate spatial proximity among the four countries in the voice response category. The four countries are indicated separately with respect to voice response. Second, the Chinese position is the furthest from those of the South Koreans and Japanese in the private response category. The American position, however, is closer to the South Korean and Japanese position than the Chinese stance. Finally, the South Korean position is closer to the Japanese opinion than those of the Americans and Chinese. One-way ANOVA tests were conducted to examine the differences between democratic factors, as shown in Table 6. Older passengers’ complaints by voice responses and third-party responses were more common than younger passengers’. Highly educated passengers were less likely to make voice responses and third-party responses than were less-educated passengers. This contradicts the results of previous research, which indicated that people with a higher level of education file complaints more frequently because they know where and how to complain (Han et al., 1995). There was not a significant difference between male and female passengers regarding complaint behavior. The more previous experience with IACs a passenger has, the more complaint behavior he/she exhibits, except for private responses. This indicates that IACs are serious situations that decrease the threshold of passenger’s complaint, provoke them into losing their temper easily, and finally cause the loss of reliability and that’s the reason why airline business should place more emphasis on acting with IACs. 5. Conclusion The results from this study showed that passengers from four countries (thus, four different cultures) have different complaint behaviors regarding IACs, and that the complaint behavior of passengers was also affected by demographic factors including age,
education and previous experience. The complaint frequency of a passenger was lower for third-party responses than for other responses. This is probably because complaints via third-party responses may involve extensive legal costs, regulatory interventions and corporate reputation problems.
References Bejou, D., Edvardsson, B., Pakowski, J., 1996. A critical incident approach to examining the effects of service failures on customer relationships: the case of Swedish and U.S airlines. Journal of Travel Research 35, 35–40. Bouter, M., Milsom, J., Mercer, C., 2000. Revising management competencies: ensuring cross-cultural validity. Competency and Emotional Intelligence 7, 12–26. Casado Diaz, A.B., Mas Ruiz, F.J., 2002. The consumer’s reaction to delay in service. International Journal of Service Industry Management 13, 118–140. Cavusgil, S.T., Kaynak, E., 1982. A framework for cross-cultural measurement of consumer dissatisfaction. In: Day, R.L., Hunt, H.K. (Eds.), New Findings on Consumer Satisfaction and Complaining. Indiana University Press, Bloomington. Day, R.L., 1984. Modeling choices among alternative responses to dissatisfaction. Advances in Consumer Research 11, 496–499. Forbes, S.J., 2008. The effects of air traffic delays on airline prices. International Journal of Industrial Organization 26, 1218–1232. Han, S., Keung, K.A., Richmond, D., 1995. Determinants of consumer complaint behavior: a study of Singapore consumers. Journal of International Consumer Marketing 8, 59–76. Hofstede, G., 2001. Culture’s Consequence: Comparing Values, Behaviours, Institutions and Organizations Across Countries. Sage, Thousand Oaks. Hofstede, G., Usunier, J.C., 1999. Hofstede’s dimensions of culture and their influence on international business negotiations. In: Ghauri, P.N., Usunier, J.C. (Eds.), International Business Negotiations. Pergamon, Tarrytown. Huang, J.H., Huang, C.T., Wu, S., 1996. National character and response to unsatisfactory hotel service. International Journal of Hospitality Management 15, 229–243. Liu, R.R., McClure, P., 2001. Recognizing cross-cultural differenced in consumer complaint behavior: replication and extension. Journal of Consumer Satisfaction, Dissatisfaction and Complaining Behavior 10, 91–103. Mattila, A.S., 2000. The impact of culture and gender on customer evaluation of service encounters. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Research 24, 263–273. Ngai, E., Heung, V., Wong, Y.H., Chan, F., 2007. Consumer complaint behavior of Asian and non-Asians about hotel services: an empirical analysis. European Journal of Marketing 41, 1375–1391. Nyer, P.U., 2000. An investigation into whether complaining can cause increased consumer satisfaction. Journal of Consumer Marketing 17, 9–19. Portfolio, 25 Feb 2008. Available from: http://www.portfolio.com. Singh, J., 1988. Consumer complaint intentions and behavior: definitional and taxonomical issues. Journal of Marketing 52, 93–107. Singh, J., 1990. Voice, exit and negative word-of mouth behaviors: an investigation across three service categories. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 18, 1–15. Sultan, F., Simpson Jr., M.C., 2000. International service variants: airline passenger expectations and perception of service quality. Journal of Service Marketing 14, 188–216. Tobias, P., 1999. Reliability. NIST/SEMATECH Engineering Statistics Handbook, Statistical Engineering Division, Ch. 8, Accession Number PB99-163222. Weber, K., Sparks, B., 2004. Consumer attributions and behavioral responses to service failures in strategic airlines alliance settings. Journal of Air Transport Management 10, 361–367.
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Journal of Air Transport Management journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jairtraman
Note
Passenger complaints under irregular airline conditions – cross-cultural study Yu-Kyoung Kim, Hyung-Ryong Lee* Department of Hospitality and Tourism Management, Sejong University, Seoul 143-747, Republic of Korea
a b s t r a c t Keywords: Irregular airline condition Complaining behavior Cross-cultural attitudes
Punctuality is seen as key component of airline service quality. This paper examines cross-cultural differences in passenger complaints regarding irregular airline conditions. Analysis of four clusters of air travelers in South Korea – from South Korea, Japan, China, and America – exhibit significantly differences in their attitudes suggestion important cultural variations. Ó 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction Punctual, predictable flight schedules can be an important factor for the success of an airline, affecting its competitiveness, productivity, customer satisfaction, and loyalty. Irregular airline conditions (IACs), usually associated with severe weather patterns, unexpected aircraft problems or airport failures can mitigate against punctuality. In general, dissatisfaction after using the products or service is the primary reason for complaints and IACs are reportedly the most common source of passenger complaints. Moreover, Hofstede (2001) demonstrated that a person’s willingness to complain about inferior service may depend upon that person’s cultural upbringing. The subject of this paper is to determine the relationship between nationality and passenger behavior.
2. Background Air transport punctuality, along with scheduling, food quality, cost, frequency, baggage delivery, cabin service, and membership of airline alliances are usually seem as the main elements of customer service (Weber and Sparks, 2004). Several IACs can occur during the flight, including delays, cancellations and diversions. Although their causes are often apparent, they can affect the image of an airline and its costs. The European Union (EU) experts’ group suggested that an unnecessary financial burden is placed on airlines and passengers that amounts to $4.4 billion annually because of air traffic control problems (Portfolio, 25 Feb 2008). It has also been reported that flight delays cause a remarkable decrease in costcompetitiveness in airline markets (Forbes, 2008).
* Corresponding author. Tel.: þ82 2 3408 3717. E-mail address: [email protected] (H.-R. Lee). 0969-6997/$ – see front matter Ó 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.jairtraman.2008.11.007
IACs are related to service failure, which occurs when a relatively implicit promise with regard to specified time of a service is violated (Casado Diaz and Mas Ruiz, 2002). Such failures can lead to wasted labor, product disqualification, lowered customer satisfaction, and damaged reputation of the firms involved (Tobias, 1999). Dissatisfaction with a product or other aspect of service exchange caused by failure is the primary reason for complaints. Specifically, feelings or emotions of perceived dissatisfaction are thought to trigger consumer complaint (Day, 1984). The benefits of complaining are that it allows dissatisfied consumers to vent their unhappiness, and can results in a more positive attitude regarding future repurchasing intentions (Nyer, 2000). A negative aspect, however, can be the ineffective handling of customers’ complaints, which reinforces negative consumer reactions (Mattila, 2000). Following a service failure, customers can complain in various ways. Singh (1990) found that consumers communicate their dissatisfaction in one of three ways. Voice responses occur when individuals seek compensation directly from the service provider. Private responses are when individuals engage in word-of-mouth communication with others regarding their unhappy experiences with others. Third-party responses occur when individuals involve an outside party to compensate for their dissatisfaction. Several studies have demonstrated that passengers from different cultures vary in their perceptions of service quality (Sultan and Simpson, 2000). Culture is fairly stable over time and is complex, encompassing the knowledge, belief, art, morals, customs, and other capabilities and habits of a society (Hofstede and Usunier, 1999). Discussions of cultural distance are mainly couched in terms of power distance, masculinity–femininity, uncertainty avoidance, individualism–collectivism, and long-term orientation. Consumers from collectivist nations tend to refrain from verbal responses for fear of losing face, but they are more likely to tell family members and friends about a bad service. Conversely, in
Y.-K. Kim, H.-R. Lee / Journal of Air Transport Management 15 (2009) 350–353 Table 1 Comparison of Hofstede’s original score of four divisions and ranking among countries. Country
PDI
IDV
UAI
LTO
South Korea U.S China Japan Average
60 40 80 54 57
18 91 20 46 43
85 46 30 92 65
75 29 118 80 45
PDI: Power Distance Index, IDV: Individualism Index, UAI: Uncertainty Avoidance Index, LTO: Long-term orientation Index.
individualistic nations, customers are likely to complain to the company as well as to a third-party (Liu and McClure, 2001). Bejou et al. (1996) found that Americans complain more, enjoy complaining, and seek quality improvement for the future whereas Chinese people are likely to engage in private complaint, and to refrain from repurchasing (Ngai et al., 2007). Singh (1990) identified that complainers typically tend to have more education, to work in more professional careers, and to be younger, and suggests that the more the consumer perceived the value of complaining, the greater the tendency to engage in voice responses.
351
Table 3 Demographic characteristics. Demographic characteristics
Country
Total
S. Korean US Chinese Japanese n ¼ 431 n ¼ 128 n ¼ 113 n ¼ 100 n ¼ 90 Gender Male Female
61 67
73 40
51 49
24 66
209 222
Previous experience 1–5 flights 6–10 flights 11–15 flights 16–20 flights 21 flights more
71 19 11 11 16
23 20 9 10 51
14 14 18 26 28
16 23 4 7 40
124 76 42 54 135
Age 24 years or younger 25–34 35–44 45–54 55 years or older
37 36 28 15 12
42 24 27 9 11
14 32 29 16 9
21 40 17 6 6
114 132 101 46 38
Education Completed high school Some college/university Completed university degree Completed postgraduate degree
38 10 51 29
9 34 52 18
27 64 9 0
13 25 46 6
87 133 158 53
3. Methodology Data were collected in South Korea after a pilot test. Surveys were conducted at the departure hall of Incheon International Airport, South Korea with the assistance of trained interviewers during July 2007. The targets were South Korean, Japanese, Chinese, and US passengers who had had an IAC experience in the past. The respondents were selected at random, and they participated at different times over the course of the study. Six hundred passengers who were dissatisfied with IACs were asked to fill out a survey regarding their previous experience. Incomplete responses led to exclusion of 9% of the 476 who accepted, giving 431 usable questionnaires. Japanese, Chinese and US passengers were chosen as the non-local travelers because, first, according to Hofstede’ (Table 1), these three groups have considerably different cultures, and second, passengers from these nations represented approximately 60% of all foreign inbound passengers (Table 2). Consistent with previous research on complaint behavior, the measures were taken or adapted from previous studies. The scales were developed by Singh (1988), and are one the most methods used for examining complaint behavior. Three aspects of complaint behavior were assessed: voice responses (four items), private responses (four items) and third-party responses (three items). The survey was composed of 16 questions, and it was available in four languages. Respondents were first asked to remember their previous IAC experiences. Next, participants were asked about their complaint behavior regarding IACs. Third, the respondents were asked about their demographic information. All responses were ranked on a Likert-type scale with options from ‘1 ¼ very low’ to ‘5 ¼ very high.’
The frequency distribution of the variables was used in order to identify the profile of the respondents and to compute the means and standard deviations for each complaint behavior variable. A series of one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) tests and Duncan’s multiple range tests was undertaken to examine which of the nationality group means were significantly different from each other.
Table 2 Monthly travelers entering South Korea.
2008.1 2007.1 2006.1 2005.1 2004.1 2003.1 2002.1 2001.1
Japan
China
US
Others
Total
153,122 170,473 154,652 197,632 145,221 155,546 155,375 163,877
80,677 56,885 55,280 44,948 54,966 35,851 33,783 42,890
40,734 38,585 34,473 34,769 31,817 30,213 29,235 31,754
210,536 170,518 188,874 180,972 241,166 163,308 143,911 159,574
485,069 436,461 433,279 458,321 423,670 384,918 362,304 398,095
South Korea Tourism Organization (January 2001–January 2008).
4. Results Table 3 summarizes the demographic characteristics of the sample from the four countries. Thirty percent of the respondents were South Korean, 21% were Japanese, 23% were Chinese, and 26% American. Principal component analysis was utilized to examine the dimensions underlying the complaint behavior with varimax rotation. Using factor analyses, one complaint behavior indicator (Forget about it and do nothing) was removed due to its reliability. The 10 items for the complaint behavior yielded three factors with eigen values greater than 1.0 and 63.4% of the variance. All Table 4 Factor analysis of complaining behavior (N ¼ 431). Items (Reliability)
Loading
I. Voice responses (.75) Discuss with airline manager or other employee Ask the firm to take care of the problem Inform the firm
0.80 0.80 0.79
II. Private responses (.76) Convince your friends and relatives not to use Buy from another airline Avoid boarding with the firm from then on Speak it to your friends and relatives
0.83 0.82 0.81 0.55
III. Third-party responses (.66) Take legal action against the firm Write a letter to the local newspaper about your bad experience Report the problem to a consumer agency
0.78 0.70
Eigen value
Variance (%)
3.28
31.4
2.29
21.6
1.10
10.4
0.51
Total variance explained: .74 KMO (Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy) ¼ .783.
352
Y.-K. Kim, H.-R. Lee / Journal of Air Transport Management 15 (2009) 350–353
coefficient alpha values were high, ranging from 0.66 to 0.76 for three component of complaint behavior (Table 4). One-way ANOVA tests showed significant differences in 9 out of 10 complaint behaviors among the four nations (Table 5). As for ‘voice responses’, the complaint behaviors of the four countries’ participants segmented broadly into two groups. Chinese and US passengers scored higher than South Korean and Japanese passengers. This result is interesting because China is often grouped together with South Korea and Japan with respect to culture, and it has been previously reported that the Chinese were not likely to engage in voice response complaining (Ngai et al., 2007). Chinese passengers showed an even higher score than US passengers, who are considered the most individualistic. This means that Chinese passengers perceive IACs seriously and have a lower uncertainty avoidance, which affects decision-making, especially when related to risk-taking (Bouter et al., 2000). The analysis of items in the ‘private responses’ section showed significant differences among the four nationalities. Generally Japanese and US passengers are more likely to engage in private responses. Interestingly, Chinese passengers showed a lesser tendency to respond privately, which was completely contrary to the ‘voice response’ results. These results are partly explained by the fact that Japanese passengers are generally collectivists and tend not to express their emotions outwardly, especially negative emotions, which is considered a way of losing face (Cavusgil and Kaynak, 1982). As for US passengers, they seem to be active not only
in voice responses but also in private responses, and this is expected considering the high value of customer satisfaction in the American culture. In contrast to ‘private responses,’ Chinese passengers are most likely to engage in ‘third-party responses’, including taking legal action. In contrast, Japanese passengers tend not to complain of IACs to a third-party. US passengers and Korean passengers are moderately active in ‘third-party response’, but they have a low
Voice response
0.5 China
-1
U.S -0.5
I. Voice responses 1. Discuss with airline manager Mean Score or other employee Duncan’s test P Mean Score 2. Ask the airline to take Duncan’s test care of the problem P
6. Buy from another airline
7. Speak to your friends and relatives about your bad experience 8. Convince your friends and relatives not to do business with that airline III. Third-party responses 9. Write a letter to the local newspaper about your bad experience 10. Report the problem to a consumer agency 11. Take legal action against the airline
1
Korea
-0.5
-1
Private response
3.60 3.72 H H
Mean Score 2.84 Duncan’s test L P 0.000
3.94 3.82 H H
2.77 L
Mean Score Duncan’s test P Mean Score Duncan’s test P Mean Score Duncan’s test P Mean Score Duncan’s test P
3.17 2.90 – –
3.07 –
3.79 3.37 H L
3.37 L
4.32 3.23 H L
4.32 H
3.46 2.89 H L
3.20 H
3.05 – 0.324 3.41 L 0.003 4.01 M 0.000 3.45 H 0.000
1
Chinese Japanese
2.57 L 0.000 3.23 M 0.000
(e. g. to replace aircraft or return your money)
II. Private responses 5. Avoid boarding with the airline from then on
0.5
Country S. Korean US
3. Inform the airline so that they will do better in the future
Japan
II
Table 5 ANOVA comparison of complaining behavior on IAC by passenger’s county. Items
I
1
2.49 L
0.5 Japan
3.90 4.00 H H
2.80 L
I
Korea
China
II -1
-0.5
0.5
-0.5
U.S
-1
Third-party response
1
I
0.5 Japan
Mean Score Duncan’s test P Mean Score Duncan’s test P Mean Score Duncan’s test P
2.26 M 0.000 2.48 M 0.000 2.09 L 0.000
1
2.22 2.86 M H
1.87 L
3.06 3.11 H H
1.94 L
1.92 2.67 L H
2.08 L
Based on mean value on a 5 Liker-type scale (1 ¼ strongly disagree and 5 ¼ strongly agree). Duncan’s multiple range tests: means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level.
China Korea
II -1
-0.5
0.5
1
U.S -0.5
-1
Fig. 1. Complaining behavior Euclidean distance model: (A) Voice response (B) Private response (C) Third-pasty response.
Y.-K. Kim, H.-R. Lee / Journal of Air Transport Management 15 (2009) 350–353
353
Table 6 ANOVA comparison of complaining behavior on IAC by passenger’s demographic characteristics. Age
Factor I: Voice Responses Factor II: Private Responses Factor III: Third-party Responses
Mean Score Duncan’s test P Mean Score Duncan’s test P Mean Score Duncan’s test P
Education
Gender
Previous experience
<24
25–34
35–44
45–54
>55
1*
2*
3*
4*
Male
Female
1–5 flights
6–10 flights
11–15 flights
16–20 flights
21 flights or more
3.06 L 0.000 3.48 – 0.560 2.21 L 0.005
3.22 M
3.48 M
3.48 M
3.68 H
3.54 H
3.10 L
3.25 L
3.38
3.24
3.12 H
3.08 L
3.46 H
3.52 –
3.34 –
3.38 –
3.51 –
3.46 –
3.64 –
3.46
0.120 3.48
3.41 –
3.54 –
3.58 –
3.46 –
2.32 L
2.59 H
2.40 L
2.56 H
2.56 H
2.14 L
2.28 L
2.44
0.801 2.33
2.38 L
2.26 L
3.34 L 0.001 3.35 – 0.297 2.40 L 0.036
3.61 L
3.48 –
3.38 M 0.001 3.37 – 0.075 2.62 H 0.000
2.69 L
2.33 H
0.147
Based on mean value on a 5 Liker-type scale (1 ¼ strongly disagree and 5 ¼ strongly agree). Duncan’s multiple range tests: means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level. 1*: completed high school; 2*: some college/university; 3*: completed university degree; 4*: completed postgraduate degree.
tendency to take legal action as a complaint behavior. The relatively lower scores of Japanese and South Korean passengers might be explained by these two countries’ cultural backgrounds; they think ‘third-party response’ is similar to expressing negative emotions outwardly. In U.S and Chinese passengers, this study is in agreement with Huang et al.’s (1996) study, which showed that consumers in individualistic nations like the US are likely to complain to a third-party, and with Singh’s (1988) study, which demonstrated that consumers in a collectivist culture might find third-party responses more comfortable because third-party responses do not directly confront the firm. Additionally, there are remarkable differences among the complaint behaviors regarding IACs in the three collectivist, East Asian countries. As shown in Fig. 1, multidimensional scaling (MDS) was used to analyze the distance and proximity of the factors. First, the relative positions indicate spatial proximity among the four countries in the voice response category. The four countries are indicated separately with respect to voice response. Second, the Chinese position is the furthest from those of the South Koreans and Japanese in the private response category. The American position, however, is closer to the South Korean and Japanese position than the Chinese stance. Finally, the South Korean position is closer to the Japanese opinion than those of the Americans and Chinese. One-way ANOVA tests were conducted to examine the differences between democratic factors, as shown in Table 6. Older passengers’ complaints by voice responses and third-party responses were more common than younger passengers’. Highly educated passengers were less likely to make voice responses and third-party responses than were less-educated passengers. This contradicts the results of previous research, which indicated that people with a higher level of education file complaints more frequently because they know where and how to complain (Han et al., 1995). There was not a significant difference between male and female passengers regarding complaint behavior. The more previous experience with IACs a passenger has, the more complaint behavior he/she exhibits, except for private responses. This indicates that IACs are serious situations that decrease the threshold of passenger’s complaint, provoke them into losing their temper easily, and finally cause the loss of reliability and that’s the reason why airline business should place more emphasis on acting with IACs. 5. Conclusion The results from this study showed that passengers from four countries (thus, four different cultures) have different complaint behaviors regarding IACs, and that the complaint behavior of passengers was also affected by demographic factors including age,
education and previous experience. The complaint frequency of a passenger was lower for third-party responses than for other responses. This is probably because complaints via third-party responses may involve extensive legal costs, regulatory interventions and corporate reputation problems.
References Bejou, D., Edvardsson, B., Pakowski, J., 1996. A critical incident approach to examining the effects of service failures on customer relationships: the case of Swedish and U.S airlines. Journal of Travel Research 35, 35–40. Bouter, M., Milsom, J., Mercer, C., 2000. Revising management competencies: ensuring cross-cultural validity. Competency and Emotional Intelligence 7, 12–26. Casado Diaz, A.B., Mas Ruiz, F.J., 2002. The consumer’s reaction to delay in service. International Journal of Service Industry Management 13, 118–140. Cavusgil, S.T., Kaynak, E., 1982. A framework for cross-cultural measurement of consumer dissatisfaction. In: Day, R.L., Hunt, H.K. (Eds.), New Findings on Consumer Satisfaction and Complaining. Indiana University Press, Bloomington. Day, R.L., 1984. Modeling choices among alternative responses to dissatisfaction. Advances in Consumer Research 11, 496–499. Forbes, S.J., 2008. The effects of air traffic delays on airline prices. International Journal of Industrial Organization 26, 1218–1232. Han, S., Keung, K.A., Richmond, D., 1995. Determinants of consumer complaint behavior: a study of Singapore consumers. Journal of International Consumer Marketing 8, 59–76. Hofstede, G., 2001. Culture’s Consequence: Comparing Values, Behaviours, Institutions and Organizations Across Countries. Sage, Thousand Oaks. Hofstede, G., Usunier, J.C., 1999. Hofstede’s dimensions of culture and their influence on international business negotiations. In: Ghauri, P.N., Usunier, J.C. (Eds.), International Business Negotiations. Pergamon, Tarrytown. Huang, J.H., Huang, C.T., Wu, S., 1996. National character and response to unsatisfactory hotel service. International Journal of Hospitality Management 15, 229–243. Liu, R.R., McClure, P., 2001. Recognizing cross-cultural differenced in consumer complaint behavior: replication and extension. Journal of Consumer Satisfaction, Dissatisfaction and Complaining Behavior 10, 91–103. Mattila, A.S., 2000. The impact of culture and gender on customer evaluation of service encounters. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Research 24, 263–273. Ngai, E., Heung, V., Wong, Y.H., Chan, F., 2007. Consumer complaint behavior of Asian and non-Asians about hotel services: an empirical analysis. European Journal of Marketing 41, 1375–1391. Nyer, P.U., 2000. An investigation into whether complaining can cause increased consumer satisfaction. Journal of Consumer Marketing 17, 9–19. Portfolio, 25 Feb 2008. Available from: http://www.portfolio.com. Singh, J., 1988. Consumer complaint intentions and behavior: definitional and taxonomical issues. Journal of Marketing 52, 93–107. Singh, J., 1990. Voice, exit and negative word-of mouth behaviors: an investigation across three service categories. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 18, 1–15. Sultan, F., Simpson Jr., M.C., 2000. International service variants: airline passenger expectations and perception of service quality. Journal of Service Marketing 14, 188–216. Tobias, P., 1999. Reliability. NIST/SEMATECH Engineering Statistics Handbook, Statistical Engineering Division, Ch. 8, Accession Number PB99-163222. Weber, K., Sparks, B., 2004. Consumer attributions and behavioral responses to service failures in strategic airlines alliance settings. Journal of Air Transport Management 10, 361–367.