Will you tolerate this? The impact of affective commitment on complaint intention and postrecovery behavior

Successful complaint management primarily depends on customers' willingness to voice their complaints and on companies' ability to adequately deal with these complaints. This article investigates the impact of one relationship characteristic in the complaint management process: affective commitment. Based on two studies, the authors investigate whether affective commitment moderates the impact of complaint barriers on complaint intention (a) and whether it moderates the link between complaint satisfaction and purchase behavior after the complaint (b). Results show that affectively committed customers exhibit higher complaint intention irrespective of the level of complaint barriers. Furthermore, affectively committed customers display little change in their postrecovery behavior, even after a service failure followed by an unsatisfactory recovery attempt. It seems that these customers are tolerant and want to help the provider improve their business. Affective commitment seems to amplify willingness to help the company by means of voicing dissatisfaction despite considerable efforts in doing so. Moreover, affective commitment buffers the negative effects of service failures on postrecovery behavior. Findings have important implications for managers. They highlight the necessity to measure customers' affective commitment. Based on that, tailored complaint systems can be designed, which help in achieving a more effective allocation of resources for customer recovery.

Satisfaction with complaint handling:a replication study on its determinants in a business-to-business context

Research on the drivers of satisfaction with complaint handling (SATCOM) underlines the importance of procedural, relational, and interactional justice (Orsingher, Valentini, & de Angelis, 2010). Since these SATCOM-studies are largely conducted in business-to-consumer (B2C) markets, it is unclear what drives SATCOM in business-to-business (B2B) markets. Therefore, we replicate the justice model in an industrial context and find significant differences for procedural justice and interactional justice but not for distributive justice. While distributive justice is equally important in both contexts, procedural justice is more important in B2B markets whereas interactional justice drives SATCOM only in B2C markets. © 2013 Elsevier B.V.

Constitutional patriotism, migration and the post-national dilemma

This article addresses the challenges of justifying restrictions on migration given a rejection of nationalism as a defensible mode of political integration. Specifically, it focuses on constitutional patriotism, which is proposed as a means of making robust democratic practice possible in diverse contexts. Given that constitutional patriotism represents a commitment to universal principles as a source of attachment rather than the binding sentiment of nationalism, can we continue to rely on nationally defined and controlled migration practices? This article argues that, appropriately understood, constitutional patriotism implies a commitment to much freer movement of individuals across political boundaries than theorists have previously acknowledged. Applying such an approach, however, provokes some challenges to the sustainability of shared rule informed by principles rather than identity. This seeming paradox may mean that constitutional patriotism is more difficult to implement, and highlights practical challenges surrounding the liberalisation of border controls that are pertinent to theorists concerned with post-national citizenship more broadly conceived.

Redefining 'media' using a 'media-as-a-constitutional-component' concept:an evaluation of the need for the European Court of Human Rights to alter its understanding of 'media' within a new media landscape

This paper considers the impact of new media on freedom of expression and media freedom within the context of the European Convention on Human Rights and European Court of Human Rights jurisprudence. Through comparative analysis of US jurisprudence and scholarship, this paper deals with the following three issues. First, it explores the traditional purpose of the media, and how media freedom, as opposed to freedom of expression, has been subject to privileged protection, within an ECHR context at least. Secondly, it considers the emergence of new media, and how it can be differentiated from the traditional media. Finally, it analyses the philosophical justifications for freedom of expression, and how they enable a workable definition of the media based upon the concept of the media-as-a-constitutional-component.