IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i5p2525-d755794.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Effective and Ineffective Service Recovery Recipes in the Peer-to-Peer (P2P) Sharing-Service Model: Using the Fuzzy-Set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (fsQCA) Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Sooyun Kim

    (School of Business, Yonsei University, Seoul 03722, Korea
    The Institute for Air Industry and Policy Research, Korea Aerospace University, Goyang-si 10540, Korea)

Abstract

In a peer-to-peer (P2P) sharing-service model, a platform provider (PP) has no direct control over the service quality of peer service providers (PSPs). However, an unpleasant experience with a single PSP may impact customer responses to the PP. Hence, the PP should offer PSPs guidelines on how to cope with service failures. To identify effective/ineffective recovery strategies, this study examined the influence of the characteristics of service failure/recovery and customers that influence customers’ behavioral intentions toward the PP. Specifically, it employed multiple regression analysis (MRA) and fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA) to analyze the complex relationships between service failure/recovery characteristics (severity of service failure and source of service recovery) and customers’ characteristics (PSP experience, age, and gender) regarding customers’ behavioral intentions (reuse and switching intentions of the PP). The results show (1) four solutions leading to high reuse intention and two solutions leading to high switching intention of the PP when the severity of service failure is high and (2) three solutions leading to high reuse intention and two solutions leading to high switching intention of the PP when the severity of service failure is low. By investigating recovery configurations reflecting the unique characteristics of P2P sharing services, this study contributes to the literature on both P2P sharing services and service failure/recovery.

Suggested Citation

  • Sooyun Kim, 2022. "Effective and Ineffective Service Recovery Recipes in the Peer-to-Peer (P2P) Sharing-Service Model: Using the Fuzzy-Set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (fsQCA) Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-13, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:5:p:2525-:d:755794
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/5/2525/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/5/2525/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Chen, Tong & Ma, Ke & Bian, Xuemei & Zheng, Chundong & Devlin, James, 2018. "Is high recovery more effective than expected recovery in addressing service failure? — A moral judgment perspective," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 1-9.
    2. Jung, Na Young & Seock, Yoo-Kyoung, 2017. "Effect of service recovery on customers’ perceived justice, satisfaction, and word-of-mouth intentions on online shopping websites," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 23-30.
    3. Belk, Russell, 2014. "You are what you can access: Sharing and collaborative consumption online," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 67(8), pages 1595-1600.
    4. Benoit, Sabine & Baker, Thomas L. & Bolton, Ruth N. & Gruber, Thorsten & Kandampully, Jay, 2017. "A triadic framework for collaborative consumption (CC): Motives, activities and resources & capabilities of actors," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 219-227.
    5. Muñoz, Pablo & Cohen, Boyd, 2017. "Mapping out the sharing economy: A configurational approach to sharing business modeling," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 21-37.
    6. Fleura Bardhi & Giana M. Eckhardt, 2012. "Access-Based Consumption: The Case of Car Sharing," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 39(4), pages 881-898.
    7. Comeig, Irene & Grau-Grau, Alfredo & Jaramillo-Gutiérrez, Ainhoa & Ramírez, Federico, 2016. "Gender, self-confidence, sports, and preferences for competition," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(4), pages 1418-1422.
    8. Wu, Pei-Ling & Yeh, Shih-Shuo & Huan, Tzung-Cheng (.T.C.). & Woodside, Arch G., 2014. "Applying complexity theory to deepen service dominant logic: Configural analysis of customer experience-and-outcome assessments of professional services for personal transformations," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 67(8), pages 1647-1670.
    9. Woodside, Arch G., 2014. "Embrace•perform•model: Complexity theory, contrarian case analysis, and multiple realities," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 67(12), pages 2495-2503.
    10. Maxham, James III, 2001. "Service recovery's influence on consumer satisfaction, positive word-of-mouth, and purchase intentions," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 54(1), pages 11-24, October.
    11. Iis P. Tussyadiah, 2015. "An Exploratory Study on Drivers and Deterrents of Collaborative Consumption in Travel," Springer Books, in: Iis Tussyadiah & Alessandro Inversini (ed.), Information and Communication Technologies in Tourism 2015, edition 127, pages 817-830, Springer.
    12. Gligor, David & Bozkurt, Siddik, 2020. "FsQCA versus regression: The context of customer engagement," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 52(C).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Qian-Qian Huang & Hong-Jian Qu & Pei Li, 2022. "The Influence of Virtual Idol Characteristics on Consumers’ Clothing Purchase Intention," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-20, July.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Dabbous, Amal & Tarhini, Abbas, 2019. "Assessing the impact of knowledge and perceived economic benefits on sustainable consumption through the sharing economy: A sociotechnical approach," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 149(C).
    2. Činjarević Merima & Kožo Amra & Berberović Denis, 2019. "Sharing is Caring, and Millennials Do Care: Collaborative Consumption through the Eyes of Internet Generation," South East European Journal of Economics and Business, Sciendo, vol. 14(1), pages 49-60, June.
    3. Francesco Pasimeni, 2020. "The Origin of the Sharing Economy Meets the Legacy of Fractional Ownership," SPRU Working Paper Series 2020-19, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    4. Akbari, Morteza & Foroudi, Pantea & Khodayari, Maryam & Zaman Fashami, Rahime & Shahabaldini parizi, Zahra & Shahriari, Elmira, 2022. "Sharing Your Assets: A Holistic Review of Sharing Economy," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 604-625.
    5. Nguyen, Stephanie & Didi Alaoui, Mohamed & Llosa, Sylvie, 2020. "When interchangeability between providers and users makes a difference: The mediating role of social proximity in collaborative services," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 506-515.
    6. Martina Toni & Maria Francesca Renzi & Laura Di Pietro & Roberta Guglielmetti Mugion & Giovanni Mattia, 2021. "The Relation between Collaborative Consumption and Subjective Well-Being: An Analysis of P2P Accommodation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-17, May.
    7. Cabral, Natália Gomes Cavalcante & Gohr, Cláudia Fabiana, 2023. "Sustainable value creation in sharing economy: Conceptual framework proposition and application in Brazilian offline communities," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 186(PA).
    8. Małecka, Agnieszka & Mitręga, Maciej & Mróz-Gorgoń, Barbara & Pfajfar, Gregor, 2022. "Adoption of collaborative consumption as sustainable social innovation: Sociability and novelty seeking perspective," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 163-179.
    9. Dingju Zhu, 2020. "Big Data based Research on Mechanisms of Sharing Economy Restructuring the World," Papers 2001.08926, arXiv.org.
    10. Emmanuelle Reuter, 2022. "Hybrid business models in the sharing economy: The role of business model design for managing the environmental paradox," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(2), pages 603-618, February.
    11. Valeria Andreoni, 2020. "The Trap of Success: A Paradox of Scale for Sharing Economy and Degrowth," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-17, April.
    12. Daisy Bertrand & Pierre-Yves Léo & Jean Philippe, 2019. "The New Go-Between Services: Peer-To-Peer Sharing Platforms In Hospitality Services," Post-Print hal-02299130, HAL.
    13. Park, Hyejune & Joyner Armstrong, Cosette M., 2019. "Is money the biggest driver? Uncovering motives for engaging in online collaborative consumption retail models for apparel," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 42-50.
    14. Ethem Ilbiz & Christian Kaunert, 2022. "Sharing Economy for Tackling Crypto-Laundering: The Europol Associated ‘Global Conference on Criminal Finances and Cryptocurrencies’," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-15, May.
    15. Meisam Ranjbari & Gustavo Morales-Alonso & Ruth Carrasco-Gallego, 2018. "Conceptualizing the Sharing Economy through Presenting a Comprehensive Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-24, July.
    16. Francesca De Canio & Davide Pellegrini & Elisa Martinelli, 2018. "Is the collaborative consumption the new buying? Social and economic aspects influencing collaborative consumption," MERCATI & COMPETITIVIT?, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2018(1), pages 19-38.
    17. Izabela Jonek-Kowalska & Radosław Wolniak, 2022. "Sharing Economies’ Initiatives in Municipal Authorities’ Perspective: Research Evidence from Poland in the Context of Smart Cities’ Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-22, February.
    18. Klein, Jan F. & Merfeld, Katrin & Wilhelms, Mark-Philipp & Falk, Tomas & Henkel, Sven, 2022. "Buying to share: How prosumption promotes purchases in peer-to-peer asset sharing," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 171-183.
    19. Stéphanie Nguyen & Sylvie Llosa, 2018. "On The Difficulty To Define The Sharing Economy And Collaborative Consumption – Literature Review And Proposing A Different Approach With The Introduction Of 'Collaborative Services'
      [De La Difficu      ," Working Papers halshs-01820276, HAL.
    20. Park, Hyejune & Joyner Armstrong, Cosette M., 2019. "Will “no-ownership†work for apparel?: Implications for apparel retailers," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 66-73.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:5:p:2525-:d:755794. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.