서비스실패는 회복되어야 하는가?

The purpose of this study was to explore relevant implications through empirical approaches, focusing on whether service failures should be recovered. An online panel was used for customers who purchased hotel services within the period from January 1, 2019 to December 31, 2019. Two types of service failure for customers who experienced service failure were identified (severe: 7 points, minor failures: from 1 point to 3 points, heavy failures: from 5 points and 7 points, 600 samples for each allocated formula), three types of service recovery ( none, apology, and rewards, allocated 200 samples each), compensation type, and the average difference was verified by the Oneway ANOVA program. First, it was confirmed that the greater the severity of service failure, the greater the disappointment and dissatisfaction with the service, and the lower the recommendation, word of mouth, purchase intention, and exit intention respectively. This suggests meaningful implications for whether the subject of this study, the service failure should be recovered. For example, a flawless service that creates satisfaction with the consumer confirms that recommendation, word of mouth, and purchase intentions are working positively. Second, in terms of corporate recovery efforts resulting from service failures, the fact that verbal apologies are more positive than when there is no recovery effort at all, and that when compensation is added, there is a more meaningful outcome, confirms the need for companies to more actively implement recovery efforts to respond to service failures. The results suggest that there is a need for service failures to be recovered. Implications of this study provide finding suggestions, and limitations and directions of this study for future research are discussed.