Customer behavioral intention

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

ScienceDirect
Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 105 (2013) 115 – 121

AicE-Bs2013London
Asia Pacific International Conference on Environment-Behaviour Studies
University of Westminster, London, UK, 4-6 September 2013
"From Research to Practice"

Customer Behavioral Intention: Influence of service delivery
failures and service recovery in Malay restaurants
Zulhan Othman*, Mohd Salehuddin Mohd Zahari, Salleh Mohd Radzi
Universiti Teknologi MARA Shah Alam 40450 Selangor Malaysia

Abstract
Service delivery failures can put restaurants out of business, if attention is not paid to the problem. In a restaurant, the
customer experience process failure if the employee is inattentive and outcome failure if the chosen menu item is not
available. Knowing that failures will always occur, it is imperative that restaurant make provisions for recovery of
these unfavorable instances. If customers are pleased with the service recovery, they may have intention to revisit or
refer services to family and friends. Thus, this study seeks to investigate influence of service delivery failures and
service recovery in Malay restaurants, in Malaysia.
© 2013 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
© 2013 Published by Elsevier Ltd. Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the Centre for EnvironmentSelection and peer-review under responsibility of Centre for Environment-Behaviour Studies (cE-Bs), Faculty of Architecture,
Behaviour Studies (cE-Bs), Faculty of Architecture, Planning & Surveying, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Malaysia.
Planning & Surveying, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Malaysia.

Keywords: Service failure; service recovery; behavioral intention

1. Introduction
The foodservice business today recognized as a global economic industry, with producers and

consumers stretch around the world (Hanafiah, Harun & Jamaluddin, 2010; Kong & Jogaratnam, 2007).
This development can be distinguish from the selection of foodservice establishments blooming in all
subsectors of the industry, ranging from hotels, food retail, catering, health foodservice, food
manufacturing and restaurants (Lewis, 2006). Kong and Jogaratnam (2007) highlighted that most
successful restaurants compete on the basis of their ability to deliver outstanding service. In other words,
restaurant industry derives success from their capability to deliver satisfying experiences to customers.
Nevertheless, even in the luxurious restaurant with the best customer-oriented strategic plans and the

*

Corresponding author. Tel.: +603-5543 5664; fax: +603-5543 5698 .
E-mail address: .

1877-0428 © 2013 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of Centre for Environment-Behaviour Studies (cE-Bs), Faculty of Architecture, Planning & Surveying,
Universiti Teknologi MARA, Malaysia.
doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.11.013


116

Zulhan Othman et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 105 (2013) 115 – 121

tightest quality control systems, immaculate service delivery cannot be assured (Chiang, 2007).
Restaurant industry, which involves a great amount of personal interaction among restaurants staff and
customers, cannot avoid errors, mistakes, failures, and complaints in the process of service delivery.
Service delivery failures can put restaurants out of business by neglecting the cause of failure (Kerr,
2004). Bitner, Booms and Tetreault (1990) initiate the examination on service failures through critical
incident technique (CIT) classified failures into three broad group: (1) employee responses to delivery
system failures, (2) employee responses to customer needs or requests, and (3) unprompted and

unsolicited employee actions. Although there exist many sub-categories to the aforementioned three
groups that may be operational in nature, the three classes effectively indicate that failures usually link to
customer evaluations of interaction with some aspect of the service organization. Service delivery failures
arise when service delivery performance does not meet the expectations of customers and can be
classified as either pertaining to the outcome or the process (Smith, Bolton & Wagner, 1999). Smith
(2007) highlighted that a process failure happened when the core service carried in a flawed or
incomplete way, resulting in poor benefit to the customer such as status or esteem. Conversely, an
outcome failure happens when certain feature of the main service is not carried, instigating in the
reduction of economic resources such as money and time to the customer.
Service recovery is referred to as action carry out to face the possibilities of a service failure (Zeithaml
and Bitner, 2000). Successful service recovery may depend on the nature of service a business offer, as
well as the category of failures the business encounter and how quickly the company responds to the
failures (Lewis & McCann, 2004). If a service providers or companies do not provide better service the
second time, this may lead to customer disappointment and loss of confidence in the service. One of the
most vital keys to providing excellent service recovery is convincing the customer to bring the failure to
Tienne, Bernhisel & Larson, 2008). If customers are satisfied with the service recovery, they may have
the intention to revisit or refer services to family and friends. Behavioral intention is imperative for a
restaurant industry because repurchase intention of discontented consumers significantly lower than the
intentions of satisfied consumers (Syzmanski & Henard, 2001). Behavioral intentions may be favorable
or unfavorable depending on the satisfaction and have been an accurate predictor of actual behavior
(Alexandris, Dimitriadis & Markata, 2002). Customers who express favorable behavioral intentions point
out that they have formed a bond with the organization (Zeithaml, 2000). An increased of overall
satisfaction can lead to a positive behavioral intention toward repurchase as well as actual re-patronage
(Anderson & Mittal, 2000). In contrast, unfavorable behavioral intentions, based on the perception of
poor quality of service may comprise intention to defect, intention to spend less money with the
organization, intention to complain and even the intention to take action (Arnould, Price & Zinkhan,
2004).
2. Ethnic restaurant in Malaysia
As with other industries, restaurant industry in Malaysia is overwhelming in the past decade with
different types of restaurants burgeoning all over the place ranging from fine dining, specialty, fast food,

casual, theme, ethnic restaurants and even combination of more than one category. Among all, ethnic
restaurants is reported to experience enormous growth not only in the last 20 years but more apparent in
the early 90s (Othman, 2007). The multi cultural patterns of ethnic groups contributed to the growth of
ethnic restaurants with a magnificent blend of foods, service, ambience, design and range of cuisines
(Talib, 2009).
There are three major ethnic groups that compose the backbone structure of ethnic restaurants in
Malaysia namely Malay, Chinese and Indian. The Malays account for sixty five percent of the


Zulhan Othman et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 105 (2013) 115 – 121

population, with Islam as the official religion, Chinese amounting to twenty percent who may be Buddhist
or Christian and ten percent Indian which largely to be Hindu and Christian (Talib, 2009). The remaining
of the ethnic groups belongs to various indigenous and a sizeable amount of expatriate (Talib, 2009).
accepted as most of these restaurants incorporate cuisines from each ethnic group and form a unique
Malaysian gastronomic heritage.
However, despite the positive growth of ethnic restaurants in Malaysia, Chinese and Indian Hindu
restaurants are more popular among their own ethnic groups. This probably because the Malays who
consume. Therefore, Malay customers are found to be less keen to patronize these restaurants. This is not
market segment by attracting all customers from various ethnic groups to dine in their establishment. This
in turn, flourishes the growth of both restaurants nationwide.
more popular and successful compared to Malay restaurants (Zahari & Othman, 2008; Othman, Zahari,
restaurants in attracting new customers were by delivering faster service to their customers. In addition,
Zahari and Othman (2008
effective service delivery given to their customers although providing fewer varieties of foods. On the
contrary, many Malay restaurants found struggling to attract as well as retaining customers although
selling various types of foods to their customers. Zahari and Othman (2008) further noted that Malay
restaurants were criticized of providing poor service delivery such as lack of service quality, poor service
encounters, and poor employee interaction with customers. In turn, many Malay restaurants found to be
unable to sustain their business operations for over a long period. Othman et, al. (2009) argued that

Malay restaurants are continuing to develop rapidly but are still having problems in terms of service
delivery failures, particularly in waiting times for food to be delivered to the customers. For the purpose
of this study, Malay restaurant is describes as restaurants that offer Malay meals at a medium price that
the table and having their food brought to them.
When service failures occurred, appropriate and effective application of service recovery will help
restaurants retain customers and reduce the costs related with customer defection and negative word of
mouth (Lin, 2006). In spite of repeated service delivery failures occurring in Malay restaurants, it is
presume that service recovery applied to apprehend the situation are not effectively executed or not even
implemented at all. Many researchers address the successfulness of service recovery in Western based
restaurants (Mattila & Cranage, 2005; Matilla, 2006; Dutta, Venkatesh, & Parsa, 2007; Choi & Matilla,
2008; Ha & Jang, 2009) and suggest all restaurants regardless of it concept and design, practices service
recovery strategies to handle any occurrence of failures in restaurants. Effective service recovery not
only corrects service delivery failures but also builds and maintains sturdy relationship eventually leading
to behavioral intention to revisit the restaurants (Ha & Jang 2009).
As previously noted, behavioral intention is imperative for a restaurant industry because repurchase
intention of discontented consumers significantly lower than the intentions of satisfied consumers
(Syzmanski & Henard, 2001). As the numbers of restaurants burgeoning throughout Malaysia, it is
indispensable to retain and create loyalty atmosphere and positive behavior among the customers in order
to survive the intense competition among the operators (Ariffin, Bibon & Raja Abdullah, 2011). Hence,
it is imperative to venture and further engrossing this issues especially in the medium class Malay
restaurants in Malaysia. Thus, this study intends to: (1) examine the factors of service delivery failure

117


118

Zulhan Othman et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 105 (2013) 115 – 121

and service recovery strategy used in Malay restaurants, and (2) investigate the relationship of service

delivery failures, service recovery, and behavioral intention of customer towards Malay restaurants in
Malaysia.
3. Sample and population
In the initial stage of the study, preliminary interviews session conducted in order to gain the restaurant
operators view and interpretation of the research issues particularly in identifying the occurrence of
service delivery failures in Malay restaurants. Based on the feedback received, eighteen participating
restaurant operators stated that service failure happened frequently in their premise. In order to measure
the experience in service failure and service recovery, a self-reported questionnaire used for data
collection. This study used convenience sampling technique where respondents participated in the study
had an experience of service delivery failure in any of the participating Malay restaurants in Malaysia.
Only customers that experience with service delivery failures while dining at Malay restaurants included
in this study. In getting adequate response, data were collected during lunch hours just after respondents
finish their meals. This approach selected to ensure that the result would be based upon actual
experiences. In order to ensure customers experience such failures, few simple questions asked, such as
have you ever dined in Malay restaurants and have you ever experience service delivery failure. If the
respond is yes, a set of questions was then preceded. The data collection process accomplished within a
phase of three months (February - April 2012), and this study manages to obtain 481 respondents.
4. Result and finding
Descriptive analysis performed to measure the average rating towards the measurement included in the
study. Table 1 shows the overall mean score of each dimension. Majority of the respondents agreed that
service delivery system failure is the most incidents occur in the Malay restaurant (M=4.17, S.D .779).
With the frequent human interaction in the restaurant establishment especially during lunch and dinner,

is in line with incidents that frequently happened in the three-star hotel segment as proved by Jamaluddin,
Hanafiah, and Hashim (2011). The next highest average rating given to failure to respond to request and
needs (M=4.03, S.D .760). This incident usually occurs because of the special request made by the
customers especially that involve changing the order and modification of a meal (less sugar/salt). Other
than that, failure to provide baby chair and no menu card also categorize in this dimension. Nevertheless,
.739).
This rating contributed by unfriendly employee, inattentive employee, poor employee hygiene, and

improper dress (not wearing standard uniform).
For service recovery measurement, verbal service recovery is more preferred by
y
Restau
simultaneously offered when the failures occur. A simple apology and explanation can respond to the
failure especially during peak hour. In addition, majority of the restaurant servers trained to offer not only
apology and explanation, but also extended empathy and acknowledgment during failure incidents. On
that consists of correction, repairs and exceptional treatment involved cost and usually will be the last
resort to recover failures incidents.


119

Zulhan Othman et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 105 (2013) 115 – 121

Table 1. Mean and standard deviation for service delivery failure and service recovery measurement

Item

Measurement

M

S.D

1

Service delivery system failure

4.17

2

Failure To respond to request and needs

4.03

3

95% CI
LL

UL

0.779

4.09

4.25

0.760

3.96

4.10

3.97

0.739

3.82

4.12

4

Service recovery verbal

4.01

0.824

3.91

4.11

5

Service recovery action

3.86

0.816

3.72

4.00

Note. CI = Confidence interval; LL = lower limit, UL = upper limit. Likert-scale. 1-strongly disagree to5-strongly agree

It is worth investigating the correlation between service delivery system failure and service recovery,
in order
method used by Jamaluddin, Hanafiah and Hashim (2011) that test the degree of association between
failure and recovery to probe the strategy used in the three-star hotel segment. Table 2 depicts the result
coefficient and it shows that verbal service recovery is outstanding as compared
to action service recovery. Verbal service recovery has moderate effect toward service delivery failure
(r=.567, p<.01), failure to respond to request and needs (r=.517, p<.01), and unprompted and unsolicited
cost correlate well with all measurements listed in the study. Although the relationship is weak between
action service recovery and all measurement of service delivery system failure,
cannot overlook it because the relationship is indeed significant.
Table 2. Correlation between service delivery system failure and service recovery strategy
Measure
1. Service delivery failure
2. Failure To respond to request and needs
4. Service recovery verbal
5. Service recovery action
Note. ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)

1

2

3

4

5

.465**
.417**

.567**
.381**

.382**
.517**
.391**

.531**
.293**

.211**

-

Lastly, two models introduced to explain the causal effect of service recovery strategy towards
behavioural intention. As shown in Table 3, service recovery is a critical determinant towards the
change in behavioural intention. Both verbal service recovery ( = .229) and action ( = .225) found
the
inclusion of satisfaction, the model can explain 23.5 per cent change in the behavioural intention.
Therefore, satisfaction mediates the relationship between service recovery and behavioural intention.
Interestingly, with the inclusion of satisfaction the explanatory power of action service recovery reduced
rbal service recovery implemented right at the moment of
failure, it will result in satisfaction and positively influence intention to re-patronize.


120

Zulhan Othman et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 105 (2013) 115 – 121

Table 3. Multiple regression analysis between service delivery failure, service recovery and behavioral intention

Service recovery verbal
Service recovery action
Satisfaction
R2

Model 1
Std.
.229**
.225**

2

Model 2
Std.
.135*
.036
.406**
.134
19.068
.127

.244
26.341
.235

Note. ** p<.01, *p<.05. Dependent variable: behavioural intention

5. Implication and conclusion
Service recovery is important for the restaurant industry especially in the Malay restaurant. From the

empirical findings, it concluded that the service recovery strategy is influential in determining future
behavioural intention. Verbal recovery strategy is the most important strategy that must be adopted by the
, and no cost in
nature, therefore, must be used frequently during failure incidents. Secondly, it concluded that, in offering
service recovery, the restaurateurs must ensure the customers satisfy with the recovery strategy because
satisfaction is a powerful force for influencing behavioural intention. Some of these findings strengthened
the result of the previous study of Magnini & Ford, 2004, Matilla & Cranage, 2005, and Ha & Jang, 2009,
in different environment. The different perceptions, especially among the restaurant customers of those
attributes have significant impact and implications for Malay restaurant operators.
For future works, it recommended having several new dimensions like recovery speed and brand
loyalty as part of the overall service recovery strategy framework. The empirical findings mention
previously based on several limitations. The limitation that applies to this study is the difficulty to
identify restaurants that have critical failure incidents as well as to get identical restaurants with similar
failure incidents. Apart from that, the strategies that apply based on the overall feedback biased to the
verbal action. It
strategy is slightly simple relatively to
the fast food and upscale restaurant.
Acknowledgements
Full gratitude goes to Universiti Teknologi MARA (UiTM), for the full support to present our finding
in this conference.
References
Alexandris, K., Dimitriadis, N., & Markata, D. (2002). Can perceptions of service quality predict behavioral intentions? An
exploratory study in the hotel sector in Greece. Managing Service Quality, 12 (4), 224-231.
Anderson, E. W., & Mittal, V. (2000). Strengthening the satisfaction-profit chain. Journal of Service Research, 3 (2), 107-120.
the customer wants.
Journal of ASIAN Behavioral Studies, 1 (2), 33-43.
Arnould, E., Price, L., & Zinkhan, G. (2004). Consumers, second edition. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Bitner, M. J., Booms, B. H., & Tetreault, M. S. (1990). The service encounter: diagnosing favorable and unfavorable incidents.
Journal of Marketing, 54, 71-84.
Chan, H., Wan, L. C., & Sin, L. Y. M. (2007). Hospitality service failures: who will be more dissatisfied? International Journal of

Hospitality Management, 26, 531-545.


Zulhan Othman et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 105 (2013) 115 – 121

Chiang, C. C.
(Doctoral dissertation, Alliant International University).
Choi, S., & Matilla, A. S. (2008). Perceived controllability and service expectations: influences on customer reactions following
service failure. Journal of Business Research, 61, 24-30.
Dutta, K., Venkatesh, U., & Parsa, H. G. (2007). Service failure and recovery strategies in the restaurant sector. International
Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 19 (5), 351-363.
Ha, J., & Jang, S. S. (2009). Perceived justice in service recovery and behavioral intentions: the role of relationship quality.
International Journal of Hospitality Management.
Hanafiah, M.H., M.F. Harun and Jamaluddin M.R., (2010). Bilateral Trade and Tourism Demand. World Applied Sciences Journal
10 (Special Issue of Tourism & Hospitality), 110-114.
Jamaluddin, M. R., Hashim, R.,. Hanafiah, M. H. (2011). Service failure and recovery in three-star hotel. Proceeding of the 12th
International Research Symposium on Service Excellent in Management, ITHACA NY, 617-626.
Kerr, A. H. (2004). Service recovery and the elusive paradox: an examination of the effects of magnitude of service failure
responsiveness, service guarantee and additional recovery effort on service recovery outcomes (Doctoral dissertation, The E.J.
Ourso College of Business Administration).
Kong, M., & Jogaratnam, G. (2007). The influence of culture on perceptions of service employee behavior. Managing Service
Quality, 17 (3), 275-297.
Lewis, H. (2006). The foodservice market outlook to 2012 Management briefing: the tricky task. Retrieved September 20, 2006,
from Just-Food Web site: http:www.just-food.com.
Lewis, B. R., & McCann, P. (2004). Service failure and recovery: evidence from the hotel industry. International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality Management, 16 (1), 6-17.
Lin, I. H. (2006). Perceptions of service failure, service recovery strategies, and behavioral intentions of hotel guests in Orlando,
Florida. (Doctoral dissertation, Lynn University).
Magnini, V. P., & Ford, J. B. (2004). Service failure recovery in China. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality
Management, 16 (5), 279-286.

Matilla, A. S. (2006). The power of explanations in mitigating the ill-effects of service failures. Journal of Services Marketing, 20
(7), 422-428.
Matilla, A. S., & Cranage, D. (2005). The impact of choice on fairness in the context of service recovery. Journal of Services
Marketing, 19 (5), 271-279.
Othman, Z., Zahari, M. S. M., Hashim, R., & Ibrahim, S. (2009). Do Thai foods outshine Malaysians foods locally and
internationally? Journal of Tourism, Hospitality & Culinary Arts, 23-34.
Ramli, A. S., & Ahmad, R. (2003). Factors influencing customers patronizing Mamak restaurants. Proceeding of the 2003 Tourism
Educators of Malaysia Conference.
Seawright, K. K., De Tienne, K. B., Bernhisel, M. P., & Larson, C. L. H. (2008). An empirical examination of service recovery
design. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 26 (3), 253-274.
Smith, A. K., Bolton, R. N., & Wagner, J. (1999). A model of customer satisfaction with service encounters involving failure and
recovery. Journal of Marketing Research, 36, 356-372.
Smith, J. S. (2007).An examination of the relationship between service recovery system structure, service operating environment,
and recovery performance. (Doctoral dissertation) Retrieved from Proquest Dissertation and Theses database. (UMI No.
3272492).
Szymanski, D. M., & Henard, D. H. (2001). Customer Satisfaction: A Meta-Analysis of the Empirical Evidence. Journal of the
Academy of Marketing Science, 1, 16-35.
asing
orientation (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Universiti Teknologi Mara, Shah Alam, Malaysia.
Zahari, M. S. M & Othman, Z. (2008). Customer reaction to service delays in Malaysian ethnic restaurants. South Asian Journal of
Tourism and Heritage, 1 (1), 20-31.
Zeithaml, V. A., & Bitner, M. J. (2000). Services Marketing, 2/e, Tata McGraw-Hill Publishing Company Limited. New Delhi.

121