Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided byn For Authors: If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service. Information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www. emeraldinsight. com/authors for more information. About Emerald www. emeraldinsight. com With over forty years’ experience, Emerald Group
Service managers are challenged to effectively shape work environments so that customer-contact employees willingly deliver outstanding customer service.
Retail and service firms attempt to “control” customer-contact employees by monitoring and rewarding input processes, job processes, and by shaping the desired outcomes (Babin and Boles, 1996; Lusch and Jaworski, 1991; Jaworski, 1988). The amount and types of training received by a customercontact employee represent input controls. Process controls include managers’ everyday prioritization, or commitment to excellent service quality.
Output controls generally include attempts at shaping behavior through extrinsic rewards, including pay, and by producing a more empathetic work environment.
The research described in this paper explores the mechanisms shaping service employee performance. First, the relative effectiveness that different control processes have in shaping quality service performance is examined. In doing so, two key prosocial employee behaviors represent performance: role-prescribed and extra-role performance (Brief and Motowildo, 1986; Organ, 1988; Katz and Kahn, 1978).
Role-prescribed behavior refers to normal activities associated with fulfilling customer requests and handling service failures. Extra-role performance refers to unprompted or unsolicited acts performed over and above the normal procedures called for to create customer The research register for this journal is available at http://www. emeraldinsight. com/researchregisters Abstract Which type of managerial control makes bank contact employees more likely to perform so called prosocial behavior toward their customers (i. e. ehaviors which contribute to the bank’s positive image, perceived good service and customers’ satisfaction)? Four types of formal controls are considered here: training, behavioral control, pay administration and managerial orientation. An empirical study performed in six branches of a charter bank shows that pay management has the strongest effect on service employee prosocial behavior. Training also affects prosocial behavior significantly, but not as strongly as does perceived pay fairness. In addition it is shown that pay is the primary contributor to these employees’ perceived workplace fairness. satisfaction.
Second, the mechanism by which these control processes affect these behaviors is explored. Specifically, the roles played by customer-contact employees’ perceptions of training, specific process controls and their pay are explored in relation to their perceptions of workplace equity and their eventual role-prescribed and extra-role behaviors. The results contribute by providing insight into the relative effectiveness of various controls in shaping desirable employee attitudes and behaviors. For instance, the efficacy of control through pay management is examined relative to more eloquent control approaches.
Cite this page
Ferrero Rocher. (2018, Sep 07). Retrieved from https://studymoose.com/ferrero-rocher-2-essay