探討品牌個性、調節焦點與服務失誤之交互作用對顧客的知覺廠商品質以及再購意願之影響

Abstract

過去研究發現，誠懇的品牌在發生失誤後即使採取補救措施，服務失誤對廠商和顧客之間所造成的關係損害比刺激品牌還來的深，本研究引入調節焦點理論，欲探討誠懇的品牌以及刺激的品牌兩種品牌個性，在沒有發生服務失誤前以及發生服務失誤且採取補救措施後，對於預防焦點以及促進焦點兩種不同調節焦點的個人，是否在知覺廠商品質以及再購意願上會產生差異？本研究為2*2*2的完全隨機實驗設計，研究結果顯示，促進焦點的個人的知覺廠商品質和再購意願皆高於預防焦點的個人，且受試者對於誠懇品牌的知覺廠商品質高於刺激品牌的知覺廠商品質。研究結果也發現，當發生失誤且補救後，促進焦點的個人無論是對於誠懇的品牌還是刺激的品牌都產生了比沒失誤時較高的知覺廠商品質，其中刺激品牌知覺廠商品質上升的幅度高於誠懇的品牌；預防焦點的個人在誠懇的品牌發生失誤且補救後，其再購意願和沒有發生失誤時的情境沒有顯著差異，然而，預防焦點的個人在刺激的品牌發生失誤且補救後，其再購意願卻顯著低於沒有發生失誤時。

Previous study found that when service failure happened, it was more damaging to relationships with sincere brand than exciting brand. This research is wondering whether the regulatory focus is the moderator of that phenomenon. Therefore, the research tests whether brand personalities, regulatory focus and service failure have three-way interaction on perceived partner quality and repurchase intention or not. This is a 2*2*2 between subjects factorial design. The result shows that promotive person have higher perceived partner quality and repurchase intention than preventive person. Furthermore, participants have higher perceived partner quality on sincere brand than exciting brand in average. When service failure happened and after recovery, promotive person have higher perceived partner quality on both sincere brand and exciting brand compare to no service failure happened, however, the magnitude is stronger on exciting brand than sincere brand. The result also shows that whether service failure present or not, preventive person have no differences on repurchase intention to sincere brand, nevertheless, when service failure happened, preventive person would have lower repurchase intention on exciting brand than service failure didn’t present.