Tratamento de reclamações: estudo exploratório junto às empresas de serviços públicos urbanos

Estuda o consumerismo, o consumerismo no Brasil e investiga o tratamento que as empresas de serviços públicos dispensam às reclamações, através de pesquisa a 3 universos: o PROCON, 9 executivos de 4 empresas governamentais de serviços públicos e ,40 consumidores reclamantes.

The monograph investigates in an exploratory way how the governmental enterprises of public services handle consumer comp1aints, in the city of São Pau 10, Brazil. The methodology follows 3 steps: 1st - A bibliographical review about consumerism, consumerism in Brazil and consumers protection, detecting trends and establishing operational definitions. 2nd - Establishment of the 11 preliminary presuppositions from where the interview's guide were built for the following 3 universes: PROCON - the governmental agency in São Paulo for consumer protection, the governmental enterprises of public services and complaining consumers. 3rd - Interviews and analysis. The monograph dealt with issues such as the structure of the enterprises wich handle the complaints; how the complaint department first appeared in the company; the interest in handling complaints considering them as a cheap feedback; the relationship between the amount of money involved in the complaint and its solution; the social c1ass who complains most; the communications channel between enterprises and consumer, the existence of repressed complaints; the preponderance of the economic interest over the social responsibility and the impact of the consumerism among the executives of the enterprises; where it is more operational to act to solve the problems pointed out by the consumerism and the possibility of transfering marketing concepts from private into governmental enterprises. The data were tabulated and analyzed and then groups of answers were put through a cross-comparison process. It was verifyed that from the 11 preliminary presuppositions 5 of them were confirmed, 4 were not confirmed and 2 were non conc1usive.