Service failure recovery on customer recovery satisfaction and attitude loyalty for airline industry: the moderating effect of brand authenticity

Abstract

The study aims to investigate the relationship between service failure recovery, customer recovery satisfaction, and attitude loyalty for airline industry. The author propose an experimentally determined model of service recovery based on the function of brand authenticity as a moderator in this study. On a sample of 250 customers in Vietnam, the current study aims to determine the connections between service recovery strategy, service recovery satisfaction, and attitudinal loyalty. This study found that apologies, politeness, and recovery speed all have a substantial impact on service recovery satisfaction, with only recovery speed having a positive relationship with attitudinal loyalty. Brand authenticity has a moderator influence on the relationship between attitudinal loyalty and service recovery satisfaction, which is an unique trait of this study. This study contributes insights into how seven service recovery strategies influenced customer loyalty and service recovery satisfaction in terms of attitudinal characteristics. Managers could strive to improve service failure at their airlines in order to increase brand authenticity now that they are aware of the recovery strategies for service failure. Furthermore, for the aggrieved clients, service providers should give sufficient recovery efforts for resolving problems caused by other customers.

IMPACT STATEMENT

The goal of this study is to see if there’s a link between service recovery and customer happiness, as well as between service recovery and attitude loyalty. The author propose an experimentally determined model of service recovery based on the function of brand authenticity as a moderator in this study. This study found that apologies, politeness, and recovery speed all have a substantial impact on service recovery satisfaction, with only recovery speed having a positive relationship with attitudinal loyalty. Brand authenticity has a moderator influence on the relationship between attitudinal loyalty and service recovery satisfaction, which is an unique trait of this study. This study contributes insights into how seven service recovery strategies influenced customer loyalty and service recovery satisfaction in terms of attitudinal characteristics. Managers could strive to improve service failure at their airlines in order to increase brand authenticity now that they are aware of the recovery strategies for service failure. Futhermore, for the aggrieved clients, service providers should give sufficient recovery efforts for resolving problems caused by other customers.

Keywords:

• Service failure recovery
• customer recovery satisfaction
• attitude loyalty
• brand authenticity

JEL CLASSIFICATIONS:

• M30
• M31
• M37

REVIEWING EDITOR:

• Osikhuemhe Okwilagwe, Bournemouth University Faculty of Management: Bournemouth University Business School, United Kingdom

SUBJECTS:

• Consumer Behaviour; Marketing Management; Services Marketing; Brand Management

Introduction

Increasing numbers of airlines and aircraft are putting the aviation industry competing more fiercely in Vietnam’s market, which has experienced growth in recent years. Firms compete with each other in order to survive, maintain their position in the marketplace in many different ways, in which delivering exceptional service seems to be a major solution (Chow, 2014). Hence, offering excellent customer service is critical for airlines all over the world (Lin et al., 2021). However, It is hard to prevent all service failures, even if service organizations provide high level of performance and have a solid client orientation (Fayos-Gardó et al., 2015). A service failure occurs when a service goes wrong and leaves clients with a negative impression of the encounter (Gelbrich & Roschk, 2011). It is ubiquitous hurdles to client satisfaction, and they are difficult to avoid within the service delivery process (Sukri et al., 2014). Particularly, in the airline sector, it has been discovered that airline service failures have a negative influence on customers’ loyalty and readiness to suggest the airline they use to others (Bejou & Palmer, 1998). In addition, many service businesses also have recognized other detrimental consequences of service failure on their profitability and success, and have taken steps to guarantee that protocols for dealing with service failure are in place (Nikbin et al., 2014). As a result, in this highly competitive service climate, securing extra opportunities with angry consumers has become more difficult, and service providers have been forced to devise effective techniques to mitigate service errors when they occur. Thus, service recovery is a critical component for service providers who want to keep their consumers happy (Matikiti et al., 2017). It can be seen as a significant marketing technique that gives service providers a second chance to reclaim dissatisfied customers (Nwokorie, 2016). In addition, service recovery also extremely important in the airline business because airlines will be able to decrease passenger betrayal and build their relationship with customers if they can efficiently recover from service failures (Christopher et al., 2002).

Previously, the majority studies on service failure have mostly focused on consumers’ service recovery expectations and satisfaction (Nwokorie, 2016) as well as service failures and customer satisfaction with service recovery (Keiningham et al, 2014; Lai & Chou, 2015; Tran 2022). In which, Nwokorie (2016) revealed that there is a substantial link between service recovery method, time, customer loyalty, and customer happiness. Meanwhile, Lai and Chou (2015) the severity of a service outage might increase customers’ expectations of a quick recovery. It also demonstrated that expectations and performance have a substantial impact on service recovery dissonance. Furthermore, Matikiti et al. (2017) sought to determine the effect of customer service failure characterizations on customer commitment, as well as the effect of service failure intensity on recovery satisfaction. It can be seen customer commitment is influenced by recovery satisfaction, and awareness of alternatives moderates the relationship between the two. While politeness, recompense, and the speed with which a service is remedied have a positive and substantial influence on satisfaction; brand authenticity and perceived authenticity have a moderating effect on contentment (Lin et al., 2021). Furthermore, several studies demonstrate other aspect that even successful recovery attempts may not result in improved consumer loyalty (Bolton & Drew, 1991). Jin, DiPietro and Fan (2019) demonstrated that once a service failure happens, customers’ perceived controllability has the capacity to influence their level of participation and evaluation outcomes in the service recovery process. Valentini, Orsingher and Polyakova (2020) developed that a unifying conceptual framework that considers emotional reactions triggered by both service failure and recovery and explains why customers are likely to get ‘emotional twice’. Ozuem et al. (2021) showed that, given the specific context of Covid-19, consumers’ responses to service failure recovery are emotionally mediated based on a challenging consumption landscape. When dealing with an airline brand, cognitive processing refers to how often a customer thinks about it, while affection refers to how much a customer feels good about it. When dealing with an airline, a consumer’s cognitive processing of the brand is measured, and affection is defined as a consumer’s good feelings toward the brand.

Thus, the goal of this study is to see if there’s a link between service recovery and customer happiness, as well as between service recovery and attitude loyalty. The author propose an experimentally determined model of service recovery based on the function of brand authenticity as a moderator in this study.

This research helps in a variety of ways, both theoretically and practically. This study found that apologies, politeness, and recovery speed all have a substantial impact on service recovery satisfaction, with only recovery speed having a positive relationship with attitudinal loyalty. In addition, there are few earlier studies that have found a moderate importance for brand authenticity in the association between customer happiness and attitude loyalty. Managers could strive to improve service failure at their airlines in order to increase brand authenticity now that they are aware of the recovery strategies for service failure. Futhermore, for the aggrieved clients, service providers should give sufficient recovery efforts for resolving problems caused by other customers. While a vast number of studies suggesting that diverse service recovery improves customer recovery satisfaction, the moderating effect of brand authenticity on attitude loyalty and customer recovery satisfaction in this study could contribute to the theory.

Literature review and hypotheses

Service failure and service recovery

Service failure research is still one of the most important issues in marketing today (Bagherzadeh et al., 2020). Because people or humans are not faultless, they likely to default at any time, service failures that lead to faults or mistakes when providing a service are not evitable and foreseeable. Thus, If the issue is not given enough attention, customer satisfaction will suffer, resulting in negative feedback from disgruntled customers (Bankova et al., 2018). In particular, prior research on airline service breakdowns and recovery can be divided into two categories (Xu et al., 2018). External factors like severe weather have been highlighted, as well as internal factors like overbooking (McCollough, 2000; Akbar & Wymer, 2017). Thus, businesses cannot guarantee fault service delivery, they can ensure that the service faults are resolved in a timely manner that meets customer expectations (Bagherzadeh et al., 2020).

Hess et al., (2003) also illustrated service recovery relates to a company’s and its employees’ attempts and activities to recover what consumers have lost in service delivery. It includes all the activities taken by a service provider in reaction to customers’ complaints (Gronroos, 1988). Thus, recovery attempts contains discounts, refunds, presents, and coupons, free service for a limited period, explanations of the failure, empathy, and apologies (Jung & Seock, 2017). Kim et al. (2023) constructed a typology of inter-related concepts in SFR and uncovered the thematic development of related research, delivering a longitudinal assessment of this domain. Moreover, the aspects of service recovery attempts are magnified because customers who have experienced a service failure generally become more ‘aware’ and emotionally involved in the service experience (McCollough, 2009). As a result, maximizing client retention by limiting defectors, including customer loss due to service failure (Reichheld & Sasser, 1990), is a more feasible goal for service organizations.

Based on Gustafsson and Johnson (2004) findings, a successful service recovery could result in a win-win situation for both the client and the company. Ok et al. (2005) explained that well-executed service recovery can improve customer satisfaction and loyalty, as well as have a direct impact on whether unsatisfied consumers stay with or defect from a company (Berry et al., 2006). In addition, Sukri et al. (2014) also showed that effective service recovery tools and efficiently handling to failures may hold, and possibly even increase, customer satisfaction and loyalty in the future. Furthermore, it may result in a higher level of customer satisfaction than would have been the case if the service failure had not occurred (Berry et al., 2006). Moreover, post – recovery consumer satisfaction has been discovered to be a necessary precursor of positive word-of-mouth advertising as well as customer loyalty (Chang & Hung, 2013). In aviation industry, passenger satisfaction is also negatively impacted by service failure, while passenger satisfaction is also favourably influenced by service recovery which can prevent negative emotion of customers (Ali et al., 2020).

According to Zemke and Bell (1990), apologizing is the first step in restoring equity from the standpoint of a service provider, because it acknowledges at the very least that the client has been inconvenienced, even if the service firm is not liable for the infraction. Whereas, time delays raise customer dissatisfaction and have a negative impact on their views of service quality (Boshoff, 1999), but rapid service recovery may have reduced unhappiness (Park & Park, 2016). Moreover, one of the other service recovery activities is pointed out by Johnston and Michel (2008) which is compensation strategy is about giving the customer some value-added benefit to balance the negative effects (Boshoff, 1999) and increasing the customer’s satisfaction (Sciarelli et al., 2017). Liao (2007) mentioned that this service recovery strategy including politeness, appreciation, friendliness, and patience which its dissatisfied customers felt they have a high priority (Park & Park, 2016). Therefore, the author proposed the following the hypothese:

H1a: Service recovery – apology positively influences customer recovery satisfaction

H2a: Service recovery – poliness positively influences customer recovery satisfaction

H3a: Service recovery – Compensation positively influences customer recovery satisfaction

H4a: Service recovery – Response speeds positively influences customer recovery satisfaction

Attitude loyalty and customer recovery satisfaction

In today’s competitive airline travel market, loyalty has been deemed a significant instrument contributing to airlines’ current and future income. Hirschman (1970) defines loyalty as the expectation that he or she will act in the future. Cheng et al, (2018) also showed that customer loyalty is described as a deeply felt commitment to repurchase or re-patronize goods from the same service providers in the future. It might lead to brand-set purchases or repetitive purchases of the same brand (Oliver, 1999). According to Wong and Sohal (2003), customer loyalty is described as customers purchasing goods or services frequently over time while maintaining a positive opinion toward the goods or services or the firm that delivers them. Besides, customer loyalty as behaviour in which attention is paid to a service provider or behaviour that occurs as a reaction to the positive behaviour of a service provider (Lam et al., 2004). The concept of loyalty is made up of two parts: attitudinal and behavioral aspects (Chan & Shaheen, 2016). According to Hsu and Lin (2016), the emphasis on behavior in behavior loyalty emphasizes gauging loyalty through buying behavior and intention, while attitude loyalty focuses on assessing brand loyalty based on consumer preferences. DeWitt et al. (2008) showed individuals’ justice perceptions of service recovery attempts affect their emotional response, which influences attitudinal and behavioral loyalty. However, customer loyalty is unaffected by apologizing or recovering quickly (Sciarelli et al., 2017). On the other hand, Chou (2015) showed that some form of service recovery (apology and compensation) has a beneficial impact on customer loyalty (both attitudinal and behavioral). Therefore, in the aviation industry, whether there is a relationship between service recovery attributes and attitudinal loyalty. Moreover, this research only focused on attitudinal loyalty, which was found positively influenced by customer satisfaction (Han & Hyun, 2018). The reason focusing on attitudinal loyalty because it is more widely used than the behavioural approach, Han and Hyun (2018) employed attitudinal loyalty to measure cruise passengers’ loyalty. As a consequence, the author employed the attitudinal dimension to measure passengers’ loyalty to airline carriers, as proposed by Han and Hyun (2018). The author has put forward the following hypotheses:

H1b: Service recovery – apology positively influences attitude loyalty

H2b: Service recovery – poliness positively influences attitude loyalty

H3b: Service recovery – Compensation positively influences attitude loyalty

H4b: Service recovery – Response speeds positively influences attitude loyalty

Customer satisfaction refers to a customer’s reaction to a company’s ability to meet his or her expectations (Jin et al., 2019), which appears to be a major predictor of important behavioral reactions including word-of-mouth referrals and loyalty (Hollebeek et al., 2019). Thus, effective service recovery has sparked a lot of attention and research since it is so vital, especially in the service business (Edvardsson et al, 2000), which may lead to raising loyalty (Choi & Choi, 2014). According to Nusair (2011), if a client has a favorable service recovery experience, their commitment is likely to enhance. Besides, customers satisfaction is well recognized by Cheng et al. (2018) as one of the conditions for enhancing customer loyalty. Customers who are happy with a service recovery are more likely to buy it again, which leads to higher brand loyalty as well as fewer complaints (Johnson et al., 2001). In addition, Mccollough (2000) also argued that excellent service recovery can boost customer loyalty. Besides, customer satisfaction has a significant impact on attitudinal loyalty (Banyte et al., 2014), and service recovery satisfaction has a strong positive impact on both word of mouth and significant optimistic influence as a whole (Kim et al., 2012). The higher their satisfaction with service recovery, the more likely they are to inform others about the benefits of doing business with the firm and encourage them to do so as well (Sciarelli et al., 2017). As a result, the service provider must constantly assess the degree of satisfaction of its consumers and apply that knowledge to improve service delivery to gain a major competitive advantage. Hence, the following hypothesis is proposed:

H5: Customer recovery satisfaction positively influences on attitude loyalty

Brand authenticity

In the disciplines of philosophy, sociology, psychology, and anthropology, authenticity has been defined in a variety of ways (Beverland and Farrelly, 2010). The majority of marketing definitions of authenticity are based on sociological and psychological notions of authenticity (Jian et al, 2019). According to psychology, individuals with higher levels of authenticity who are driven by their activities from inside rather than from without, and so are less inclined to modify their behaviour owing to external pressure or influence (Kernis & Goldman, 2006). While, the identified variables (i.e. brand heritage, brand nostalgia, brand commercialization, brand clarity, brand’s social commitment, brand legitimacy, actual self-congruence, and staff passion) can consider as these factor impacting brand authenticity (Fritz et al, 2017). Moreover, as a counterbalance to current society’s technical complexity, Wang (1999) investigated consumers’ great need for authenticity. Travelers ask to relaxing time, be genuine to themselves, and have real experiences as an activity apart from the limitations of daily life (Lin et al, 2021). Tran and Keng (2018) developed the scale measurements through a comprehensive literature review, and tests the validity of the scale. In this research, the 17-item brand authenticity scale captures in a reliable and stable way six dimensions of brand authenticity: virtue, connection, reality, aesthetics, control and originality. Tran and Nguyen (2022) developed a new model presenting positive significant relationships among brand experience, brand authenticity, and brand equity and customer satisfaction. Especially, it is a valuable contribution to branding subject that brand experience positively affects the authenticity of the global brand. Brand authenticity impacts purchase intentions as a key aspect of brand identification and brand identity. It suggests an original location, a dedication to quality, and continuity of the brand essence. Furthermore, prior research has shown that brand authenticity enhances brand attitude (Manthiou et al., 2018). Moreover, Manthiou et al. (2018) revealed that brand authenticity enhances brand impression and brand love.

In the aviation industry, customers may give an opportunity to choose the airline brand that they have good experiences to make them trustworthy if they pay more attention to safety procedures in the airline business. If customers are more satisfied after flying with a certain brand, they are more likely to fly with that brand again and develop brand loyalty over time (Lin et al, 2021). Individuals that are highly motivated to fulfill a given function strengthen their attribution of authenticity, therefore it’s reasonable to suggest that brand ambassadors improve a brand’s authenticity (Wickham, 2013). As a result, the following hypothesis predicts that brand authenticity will play a moderator function in this study:

H6: Brand authenticity has moderator effect between attitude loyalty and customer recovery satisfaction.

Methodology

Research framework

A beneficial effect of service recovery on customer satisfaction has been proven in the marketing literature. Emadi and Swaminathan (2018) demonstrated that a positive effect of service recovery on customer satisfaction. Moreover, The empirical results showed that service recovery and customer satisfaction show a significant positive correlation. Politeness, compensation, and response speed of service remediation have a positive and significant impact on satisfaction; brand authenticity and perceived authenticity have a moderator effect (Lin et al. 2021). In the airline and hospitality industry, an authentic experience is an essential motivation for a passenger; therefore, when a perceived authenticity and brand authenticity are high, the need for authenticity is satisfied, and the passenger is more likely to repurchase the airlines and recommend it to others. It has been found that the perception of authenticity positively affects customer satisfaction for service recovery (Beverland & Farrelly, 2010; Manthiou et al., 2018) Thus, from all the previous literature, the author assumed the primary study proposal examining these variables including Service recovery characteristics, Customer recovery satisfaction, Attitude Loyalty, Brand Authenticity. Moreover, brand authenticity as a moderator in the realtionship between customer recovery satisfaction and attitude loyalty. The suitable conceptual framework was represented in Figure 1.

Figure 1. Research framework.

Questionnaire design

This study uses the purposive sample approach to look into customers who have had service problems with a certain airline. Five-point Likert-type scales were used to assess all of the items. The participants were asked to fill in whether they had ever experienced a scenario or had a perception of service failure at the beginning of the questionnaire basic information. Gender, age, educational level, and occupation are among the demographic factors. the satisfaction of airline customer recovery satisfaction was measured using the three items below, which were modified from Smith et al. (1999). The 16 items measured apology, compensation, response speeds, politeness were also based on Mostafa et al. (2015). While, 10 elements derived from Akbar and Wymer (2017) were used to assess brand authenticity. Moreover, attitude loyalty was measured with three items adapted from Sciarelli et al. (2017).

Demographic statistics

The questionnaire to 300 respondents was launched through Google form. A total of 250 valid responses have been received. There were 51 incorrect responses because the reversed scale questions were not answered correctly. In which, 116 (46%) were from men and 134 (44%) were from women, however the one who work in financial sector makes for the majority of the population. The majority of responders (65, 26%) were between the ages of 30 and 40. The largest (93, 37%) had attended Associate Bachelor Degree (Table 1).

Table 1. Response rate of groups.

Category	Number of respondents	Percentage
Gender
Male	131	53%
Female	119	47%
Age
Less than 20	60	24%
20–30	59	24%
30–40	51	20%
40–50	39	16%
50–60	31	12%
Above 60	10	4%
Occupation
Student	90	36%
Business Administration	55	22%
Service industry	42	17%
Free industry	38	15%
Retirees	15	6%
Others	10	4%
Education
High school or below	25	10%
College/ University	170	68%
Master Degree	42	17%
PHD Degree	13	5%

Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA)

Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) was utilized to determine the measurement models’ convergent and discriminant validity (Hair et al., 2009). Convergent and discriminant validity of the measurement model in this study are examined using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). The goodness-of-fit of CFA is utilized to further examine the constructs’ convergent validity. In the CFA results were represent through the following indexes including Chi-square/df (cmin/df) = 1.389, Goodness of fit index (GFI) = 0.932, Adjusted goodness of fit index (AGFI) = 0.914, Comparative fit index (CFI) = 0.970, Root mean squared error of approximation (RMSEM) = 0.034, Tucker Lewis Index (TLI) = 0.965. As a result, all of the variables in this study were within the acceptable range (Table 2).

Table 2. Confirmatory factor analysis.

Measure	Threshold	Present study results	Source
Chi-square/df (cmin/df)	≤ 2 good; ≤ sometimes permissible	1.389	Hair et al. (2009)
Goodness of fit index (GFI)	≥ 0.9: acceptable; ≥ 0.8: marginal	0.932	Hair et al. (2009)
Adjusted goodness of fit index (AGFI)	≥ 0.8	0.914	Hair et al. (2009)
Comparative fit index (CFI)	≥0.95 great; ≥0.90 traditional; ≥0.80 sometimes permissible	0.970	Hair et al. (2009)
Root mean squared error of approximation (RMSEM)	≤0.05 good; ≤0.08 moderate	0.034	Hair et al. (2009)
Tucker Lewis Index (TLI)	≥0.90	0.965	Hair et al. (2009)

Construct validity

It is a high degree of reliability if the Cronbach’s coefficient falls between 0.7 and 0.98; if it goes below 0.35, it must be eliminated. Fortunately, each variable’s average value was a range between 0.720 and 0.920. Thus, the reliability of all the variables including service recovery attributes including compensation, apology, speedy, politeness, aattitude loyalty, customer recovery satisfaction, brand authenticity was acceptable (Table 3).

Table 3. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) fitting Indices.

	Estimate	t-value	Cronbach	CR	AVE
Compensation			0.848	0.852	0.537
COM1	0.740
COM2	0.718
COM3	0.675
COM4	0.664
COM5	0.853
Apology		–	0.854		0.595
APO1	0.725
APO2	0.772
APO3	0.825
APO4	0.763
Response speed			0.793	0.804	0.508
RES1	0.697
RES2	0.804
RES3	0.700
RES4	0.643
Politeness			0.720	0.774	0.540
POL1	0.621
POL2	0.670
POL3	0.887
Attitude loyalty
AL1	0.895		0.753	0.778	0.545
AL2	0.671
AL3	0.621	–
Customer Recovery Satisfaction			0.887	0.788	0.553
CRS1	0.739
CRS2	0.773
CRS3	0.719
Brand Authenticity			0.920	0.938	0.604
BA1	0.725
BA2	0.762
BA3	0.723
BA4	0.862
BA5	0.700
BA6	0.843
BA7	0.775
BA8	0.821
BA9	0.776
BA10	0.773

The factor loading of the majority of the items was greater than 0.5 (Hair el al., 2009). Furthermore, each construct’s average variance extracted (AVE) ranging from 0.508 to 0.604 which is greater than 0.5. While all construct reliability (CR) values ranging from 0.774 to 0.938 which are greater than 0.7. Therefore, results were acceptable (Table 3).

Discriminant validity was tested by comparing the square root of AVE of a latent construct is higher than all the construct correlation The findings revealed that compensation, apology, promptness, politeness, attitude loyalty, customer recovery satisfaction, and brand authenticity all had square AVE values (Table 4). As a result, the results were satisfactory (Hair et al, 2009).

Table 4. Discriminant validity.

	AP	PL	CP	RS	RC	AT
AP
PL	0.071**
CP	−0.189**	−0.065**
RS	0.240**	0.291**	−0.141**
RC	0.346**	0.251**	−0.174**	0.281**
AT	0.187**	0.138**	−0.126**	0.216**	0.250**

Hypothesis testing

We developed a structural equation model to test the hypothesis after obtaining acceptable reliability and validity results. Various indices of structural model normed, chi-square/df (cmin/df) = 1.389, Goodness of fit index (GFI) = 0.932, Adjusted goodness of fit index (AGFI) = 0.914, Comparative fit index (CFI) = 0.970, Root mean squared error of approximation (RMSEM) = 0.034, Tucker Lewis Index (TLI) = 0.965. All the results were accepted (Hair et al., 2009) (Figure 2).

Figure 2. Results of model testing.

Overall, within 9 proposed hypotheses have 4 hypotheses unsupported and the rest is definitely supported (Table 5). Data analysis indicated that apology has a significant, effects to service recovery satisfaction (β = 0.360, p < .001). Thus, H1a is supported. However, apology has no significant positive effects on attitude loyalty (β = 0.089), H1b is unsupported in this study. In addition, politeness (β = 0.2160, p < .01) also have a significant, positive impact on service recovery satisfaction. Thus, H2a is also supported. However, it can be seen that politeness has no significant influence on attitude loyalty. Follow by, compensation have no found the positive relationship with attitude loyalty (β = –0.085) and service recovery satisfaction (β = –0.092). Thus, H3a, H3b are unsupported. Moreover, response speed has significant positive relates to both attitude loyalty (β = 0.146, p < .01) and service recovery satisfaction (β = 0.119, p < .01). Hence, H4a, H4b are also supported. Finally, service recovery satisfaction was positively predicted by attitude loyalty (β = 0.175, p < .01).

Table 5. Results of hypothesis test.

Hypotheses	Path	Standardized path coefficient	Result
H1a	APO→ CRS	0.360***	Support
H1b	APO → ATL	0.089	Unsupport
H2a	POL→ CRS	0.2160**	supported
H2b	POL→ ATL	0.048	Unsupported
H3a	COM→ CRS	−0.092	Unsupported
H3b	COM→ ATL	−0.085	Unsupported
H4a	RES→ CRS	0.119**	Support
H4b	RES→ ATL	0.146**	Support
H5	CRS→ ATL	0.175**	Support

Note. N = 249, *p < .05; **p < .01; ***p < .001.

Moderation results

The author investigates if brand authenticity may be used to analyze the impact of service recovery satisfaction on attitude loyalty (moderator). According to the moderating effect of brand authenticity illustrated in Figure 3, brand authenticity has a considerable influence on the link between attitude loyalty and service recovery satisfaction (moderate path coefficient = 0.287***, p < 0.001), supporting Hypothesis 6. Specifically, service recovery satisfaction correlated with brand authenticity, with individuals with lower levels of brand authenticity having lower levels of attitude loyalty. Those with a higher level of brand authenticity showed higher levels of attitude loyalty when they were more satisfied in service recovery.

Figure 3. Plotted interaction of customer recovery satisfaction and attitude loyalty on brand authenticity.

Discussion

The purpose of this study is to see if airline customer service recovery influences customer satisfaction and attitude loyalty. It also investigates whether brand authenticity has a moderating effect on the relationship between customer recovery satisfaction and attitude loyalty. Despite the fact that a substantial body of research shows that different service recoveries improves customer satisfaction, considerably less consideration has been devoted to the moderating influence of brand authenticity. Furthermore, this study suggested that all service recovery techniques, such as making an apology and speedy recovery, compensation, and politeness, had an impact on attitude loyalty. Thus, this study was designed to examine 6 hypotheses. The results stated that apologizing have a positive impact on service recovery satisfaction, which quite contract to the findings of Lin et al. (2021). This study support one of service recovery is making an apology optimistic influence on service recovery satisfaction. In aviation sector, Atuo and Kalu (2017) illustrated apology is a service recovery technique that is both a tool for calming down an irritated client and a weapon for increasing loyalty. However, Lin et al. (2021) did not find any relationship between apology and service recovery satisfaction. Moreover, Levesque and McDogugall’s (2000) review also supported Lin et al. (2021) finding that apologizing alone is ineffective, especially in the case of a fundamental service failure. In addition, customers are not able to feel satisfied if they have not received any politeness attitude from the airline company during the recovery service process, Sciarelli et al.’s (2017) and Liao (2007). They demonstrated that being politeness has a substantial influence on service recovery satisfaction. Furthermore, recovery speed was shown to have a substantial beneficial influence on service recovery satisfaction, which is in line with Lin et al. (2021), Sciarelli et al.’s (2017), and Mostafa et al. (2014), Wirtz and Mattila (2004). According to these prior authors, recovery speed has a favorable influence on service recovery satisfaction. On the other hand, this study found that compensating customers for their service failure has no substantial beneficial influence on service recovery satisfaction in aviation industry, which is contrast to the findings of Lin et al. (2021), Sciarelli et al.’s (2017) and Kim’s (2007) in other sectors. The mentioned authors argued that compensation is a good way to improve consumer satisfaction with service recovery. However, our findings were consistent with those of Mostafa et al. (2014), indicating that compensation would not have an impact on service recovery satisfaction. Thus, customers witness expressing an apology, receiving politeness, and responding quickly as one of the cornerstones for the service provider to raise customer satisfied feeling during recovery service, while compensation seems to be not relevant to service recovery satisfaction.

Furthermore, this study emphasizes how service recovery strategies such as apologizing, compensating, speeding up recovery, and being polite may have a good influence on attitude loyalty. As a result, the relationship between recovery speed and attitude loyalty in the aviation sector has become significant which contradicts the outcome of Lin et al. (2021). They claimed that all service recovery techniques, with the exception of making an apology and recovering quickly, had an impact on customer loyalty. While other recovery actions containing making apology, being politeness and compensations are not supported in the context of Viet Nam airline industy. According to Komunda and Osarenkhoe (2012) and Yaya et al. (2013), service recovery efforts lead to positive WOM behavior and the propagation of positivity for the service provider. Chou (2015) mentioned that apology and compensation which is kind of service recovery influence not only positively on customer attitudinal loyalty but also behavioral loyalty, which is defintely constrast to this finding. Thus, in the aviation context in Vietnam, service recovery speed seems to be considered as one of the effective strategies because it positively affects passenger loyalty. From there, it will help the airline to create loyal customers. That is why a quick response can easily win customers over as it makes them feel cared about and valued for the business. Moreover, customer recovery satisfaction positively influences on attitude loyalty which was found in this study. Cheng et al. (2018), Banyte et al. (2014), and Cambra-Fierro et al., (2017) all found that service recovery satisfaction had a large beneficial impact on customer attitudinal loyalty.

In addition, the current study investigated the distinctive characteristic of brand authenticity in the direct and indirect relationships between service recovery satisfaction and attitudinal loyalty. As a result, the moderator’s findings are regarded as special point to add to the prior hypothesis. This recommends the positive linkage between customer customer recovery satisfaction and attitude loyalty decreases when people are a high level of brand authenticity. It can be inferred that High brand authenticity among consumers diminishes the positive consequence of customer recovery satisfaction and the resultant consumer attitudinal loyalty. Moreover, it can be seen customers who have high levels of brand authenticity are more likely to be satisfied with their recovery.

Conclusion

In today’s dynamic marketplace, most airline companies focus on preserving and sustaining their clients, because customers increasingly complain frequently when companies fail to fulfill their standards or expectations (Atuo & Kalu, 2017). There has been progress in recovering from insufficient service delivery, which has gotten a lot of attention in the literature so far. Hence, the purpose of this study is to see if airline customer service recovery influences customer satisfaction and a key sort of loyalty known as attitude loyalty. Besides, this study also examines the moderating impact of brand authenticity. These findings are not entirely consistent with previous research that has looked at such variables in the context of service restoration strategy. Firstly, some of the results of this study contradict that of Lin et al. (2021). Within these service recovery variables, only recovery speed had a positive effect on attitude loyalty, whereas except compensation, the rest of the recovery service recovery variables were supported which have a positive impact on customer recovery satisfaction. While Lin et al. (2021) claimed that apologizing had a negative impact on service recovery satisfaction, they also stated that politeness, compensation, and reaction speed have favorable impacts. According to Sciarelli et al. (2017), apology and recovery speed approach have no substantial impact on customer loyalty, both directly and indirectly through customer recovery satisfaction.

Theoretical contributions

This study is an opportunity to investigate the relationship between service failure recovery, customer recovery satisfaction, and attitude loyalty for airline industry. Based on the review of existing concepts and studies, the research also expands and develops definitions of the components of service recovery, customer recovery satisfaction, and attitude loyalty in the context of the airline business in Vietnam. This study found that apologies, politeness, and recovery speed all have a substantial impact on service recovery satisfaction, with only recovery speed having a positive relationship with attitudinal loyalty. In addition, there are few earlier studies that have found a moderate importance for brand authenticity in the association between customer happiness and attitude loyalty. Thus, in the context of the airline business in Vietnam, this study discovered a moderate effect of brand authenticity in the relationship between customer satisfaction and attitude loyalty.

Practical contributions

This study has a lot of implications for airline management since it reveals service failure recovery strategies. Managers can attempt to reduce service failure at their airlines in order to boost brand authenticity. Furthermore, because of the impact on customer satisfaction and loyalty (Sciarelli et al., 2017), this research advises managers to think like customers, appreciate and pamper their customers, and surpass their expectations. Then, managers should be interested in ensuring and implementing efficient service recovery processes to their staff. Moreover, airline companies must also take feedback and complaint handling into their serious consideration. Because service recovery speed was found to affect both customer satisfaction and their loyalty in this study. In addition, when customers believe an airline’s attitude is sincere, their pleasure is less likely to change as a result of the airline’s apologetic conduct. Besides, airlines could also create their brand image; they may use a brand collaboration approach to increase existing customer groups’ loyalty and brand repute while maintaining their present market position.

Limitation and directions of future research

Although this research adds to our understanding of attitude loyalty, brand authenticity, and recovery satisfaction, it does have certain drawbacks. This study collected data using quantitative methods and concentrated on a single industry in Ho Chi Minh city of Vietnam, with an emphasis on airline services. To improve the relevance of the findings, future study should use a longitudinal design with both qualitative and quantitative approaches, as well as investigate other regions of these countries. Besides, it focuses on investigating the impact of service recovery strategies on positive outcomes such as customer loyalty, and recovery satisfaction implying that more research is needed to understand their impact on some negative outcomes. Moreover, this study classified service recovery strategies to investigate the effects of each strategy on customer loyalty and recovery satisfaction into four types: compensation, apology, politeness, speed of recovery. As a result, future researchers may want to compare more service recovery kinds to each other in order to explore a different types of customer loyalty more thoroughly.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Van Dat Tran

Van Dat Tran is a lecturer in marketing and currently heads the Department of Marketing, Faculty of Business Administration, Ho Chi Minh University of Banking, Vietnam. Van Dat Tran is currently working as head of the Department of Marketing, Faculty of Business Administration, Ho Chi Minh University of Banking, Vietnam. He has completed his doctorate from Taiwan in Industrial and business management. Presently, he teaches subjects such as consumer behaviors, consumer psychology, brand management, marketing management, digital marketing.