The role of employee emotional competence in service recovery encounters

Abstract

Purpose Employees’ emotional competencies (EEC) are skills, based on emotional intelligence, used to perceive, understand and regulate customer emotions during a service encounter. In the context of service recovery, these skills are especially important and allow employees to influence consumers’ attitude and behaviours. The purpose of this study is to assess the direct and indirect impacts of EEC in post-recovery satisfaction, trust, word-of-mouth and repurchase intention, considering the moderating role of service (level of employee-customer contact) types. Design/methodology/approach A total of 355 customers who experienced a service failure and subsequent recovery were surveyed using a self-administered questionnaire. EEC was specified as a formative construct, determined by its perceiving, understanding and regulating dimensions. To measure EEC and its impact on selected outcomes, PLS-SEM was used. A multi-group analysis was performed to analyse the moderating role of service type. Findings Results confirm EEC as a formative construct, with a positive direct impact on post-recovery satisfaction, particularly in high-contact customized services. Findings also reveal the mediating role of satisfaction on selected outcomes, and the significant direct impact of EEC on trust, even when controlling for satisfaction. Originality/value EEC remains unexplored in the service recovery literature, and most research fails to understand how EEC role may vary given contextual differences. This study adopts a consumer perspective of EEC in the emotionally charged situation of service recovery, considering the moderating role of service type. The authors further contribute to both literature streams while examining the impact of EEC on post-recovery evaluations. Companies should consider these findings in the recruitment and training of front-line employees to develop better service recovery strategies.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 53 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.