The Net Promotor Score (NPS) is one of the most well-known metrics for measuring customer loyalty. Originally designed by Reichheld (2003), the measure asks participants to rate their likelihood to recommend the brand on a scale of 0-10, after which respondents are placed into a ‘detractors’ group, ‘passive’ group or ‘promotors’ group. While the measure has attracted much attention due to its simplicity and ease of use, there has equally been much criticism of its reliability, nomological validity and how it is connected to business outcomes. Therefore, the current study aims to understand whether the NPS can be used to identify brand advocacy, and secondly, does the NPS work in a care-based, low switching service context. The study included three unique contexts: at home care, residential care and disability care. In total, there were 611 participants, all of which were based in Australia. A questionnaire was developed and administered to each group and included both quantitative and qualitative questions to understand the consumer experience. The findings supported NPS as an effective metric in a care-based, low-switching context for identifying positive customer advocacy. The implication is that the NPS can be used to track organizational performance; and the extended NPS allows organizations to understand and encourage (address) positive (negative) advocacy. In addition, suggestions for an ‘earned advocacy score’ were provided which may offer a more effective way of understanding consumer experience, while providing clearer, more detailed and more actionable data. The current study provides much needed insight for brand and care organizations to understand how the NPS might be used effectively to facilitate better brand outcomes.

Introduction The term “coping”refers to the actions or thoughts that people use to deal with stressful encounters (Folkman, Lazarus, Gruen, & DeLongis, 1986). Coping strategies are adopted to change the stressed person-environment relationship by either confronting and/or by regulating the emotions (Lazarus & Folkman, 1987). Research focusing on coping mechanisms has been a prolific area of study, emerged from a wide range of disciplines including psychology, sociology, and anthropology. However, for marketing researchers, questions still remain about the issue of how coping strategies are manifested in everyday consumption contexts. This represents an important area of research in that consumer coping behavior can determine critical post-purchase outcomes such as re-patronage intention, repurchase intention, and word of mouth (Raghunathan & Pham, 1999). When a service failure occurs, consumers frequently experience negative emotions and make decisions under emotionally taxing conditions (Yi & Baumgartner, 2004). Numerous scholars have made attempts to understand various consumption-related emotions and subsequent conditions corresponding to them (e.g., Raghunathan & Pham, 1999; Richins, 1997; Sujan et al., 1999). However, despite the large volume of studies focusing on consumer emotions, very few studies have examined the relationships between negative emotions with consumer coping strategies (Yi & Baumgartner, 2004). With that in mind, the primary aim of this conceptual paper was to propose a model that delineates consumer coping mechanisms derived from negatives emotions in a service failure and recovery context. Conceptual Model Coping strategies are closely linked with an individual’s attempt to manage a given stressful environment (Lazarus, 1991). Lazarus and Folkman (1984) defined coping as “constantly changing cognitive and behavioral efforts to manage specific external and/or internal demands that are appraised as taxing or exceeding the resources of the person”(p. 141). Menaghan (1983, p. 159) defined coping efforts as “specific actions (covert or overt) taken in specific situations that are intended to reduce a given problem or stress.”Duhachek (2005) defined coping construct as “the set of cognitive and behavioral processes initiated by consumers in response to emotionally arousing, stress inducing interactions with the environment aimed at bringing forth more desirable emotional states and reduced levels of stress.”Thus, the key aspects of coping includes a consequence of emotion, a dynamic process, and behavior and emotional domains of consumer responses (Duhachek, 2005). Implicit in this conceptualization is the idea that links the emotions aroused from a particular circumstance, coping strategies, and subsequent behaviors. As shown in Figure 1, our conceptual model classifies a wide range of negative emotions generated by a service failure that are linked to a set of consumer coping strategies. This will in turn influence subsequent consumer post-purchase behaviors. The behaviors will be either retaliatory (vindictive WOM, brand switching, complaining) or conciliatory (positive WOM, re-patronage intention, repurchase intention) responses. Related Literature When an individual encounters a stressful event, different negative emotions are triggered according to one’s distinct appraisals of the situation (Lazarus, 1991). These appraisals, in turn, affect how the consumer responds to the situation emotionally and behaviorally. These emotions remain powerful until the emotion eliciting problems are resolved. Proposition 1. Cognitive appraisal of the service failure situation evokes negative emotions. While some studies use combined negative emotions to explain resultant consumer behavior, others suggest separate emotion inventories (Lerner & Keltner, 2001) as different emotions trigger huge variation in cognition. Consumer negative emotions that are associated with a service failure condition can be categorized into several subsets (Watson & Clark, 1992). Many studies have utilized a limited number of negative emotions to explain consumer behavior in a service failure context (Nguyen & McColl-Kennedy, 2003). Bonifield and Cole (2006) used an appraisal-tendency framework to predict the underlying mechanism of anger and regret, associated with consumers’appraisals about service failure and their effects on post-purchase behaviors. Yi and Baumgartner (2004) focused on four negative emotions of anger, disappointment, regret, and worry in a purchase context to investigate their linkages to consumer coping strategies. Further, Tronvoll (2011) identified a set of negative emotions experienced in unfavorable service experiences leading to consumer complaint such as shame, sadness, fear, anger, and frustration. Although some marketing theorists consider the emotion of frustration to be an overlap with anger, they can be distinct emotions, especially in the context of service failure, because blaming someone else is different from blaming no particular others (Roseman, 1991). Therefore, the subsequent behavior and adapting coping strategy may differ. Thus, this study distinguished frustration separated from anger. Building on the aforementioned research, this study identified five different categories of negative emotions that are frequently found in a purchase-related situation: anger, frustration, disappointment, regret, and anxiety. Anger associates with feeling of attacking someone or yelling, resulting from an individual to be blamed on of the situation (Lazarus, 1991). Frustration tends to occur when people attribute a goal incongruent event to situational factors (Roseman, 1991). Disappointment refers to the feeling occurred due to the outcome insufficient to meet the expectation (Ortony et al., 1988). Regret is evoked when alternative option seems to be better than the selected one (Zeelenberg et al., 1994). Anxiety is linked to uncontrollable circumstances that are not directly under the purview of the provider or the customer (Ruth, Brunel, & Otnes, 2002). Proposition 1-1. Consumer negative emotions associated with a service failure situation are categorized into anger, frustration, disappointment, regret, and anxiety. Appraisal theorists contend that people use different coping strategies to reduce negative emotions accordingly (Lazarus 1991). In this study, consumer coping strategies were categorized into engagement (problem-focused, emotion-focused) and disengagement categories. Coping strategies in the engagement category involves individuals actively trying to manage, control, or change both problem- and emotion-focused aspects of the stressful person and/or environment transaction (Tobin et al., 1989). Problem-focused coping occurs when an individual tries to manage the source of the stress. Emotion-focused coping refers to where the individual changes the meaning of the event or regulates the expressing emotions (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984). In the disengagement category, mental disengagement strategy involves doing other things to take one’s mind off the problem, denial (refusing to believe that something has happened), distancing (refusing to think about the problem), and escape/avoidance (wishing problem would go away or somehow be over with). On the other hand, behavioral disengagement strategy involves consumers deciding to give up further action as nothing can be done about the situation. They acknowledge that a goal cannot be reached and that further efforts are futile. As the mechanism behind each type of coping strategy differs, the negative emotions generated from varying conditions are linked accordingly. Since anger arises from appraisals of other-responsibility, angry consumers often manifest in confrontive coping, aggressive action towards the blameworthy organization (Smith & Bolton, 2002). With respect to frustration, one is more likely to foster support-seeking coping as this does not imply blame attribution to a particular person or organization (Roseman, 1991), Further, previous work has suggested that person-related disappointment tends to result in confrontive coping behaviors such as direct complaining (Zeelenberg & Pieters, 2004) and behavioral disengagement (Yi & Baumgartner, 2004). On ther other hand, complaining about it or telling others is unlikely take place for regret as this may highlight he or she mistake (Zeelenberg & Pieters, 2004). Lastly, anxiety tends to be associated with escape behaviors (Roseman, Antoniou, & Jose, 1996). Thus, anxiety consumers often are linked with emotion-focused coping such as mental disengagement. In addition, more proactive, problem-focused coping is likely to take place as stated in some other studies (Yi & Baumgatner, 2004). Proposition 2. Negative emotions have differential impacts on consumer coping strategies. Service failure literature indicates that negative emotions influence diverse retaliatory responses. Romani Grappi and Dalli (2012) contended that negative emotions of anger, discontent, dislike, embarrassment, sadness, and worry are associated with behaviors such as switching, complaining, and negative word of mouth. Maute & Dubé(1999) also indicated that customer anger is liked to exit and negative WOM. Likewise, Blodgett et al. (1999) similarly suggested that consumers are prone to spread negative word of mouth when they perceive service failure. However, even if a particular coping strategy is activated, depending on the strategy applied, the subsequent behavior can be changed. Many researchers indicated that when a service failure is not recovered, it is more likely to lead to negative WOM and complaining behavior (Anderson, 1998). Especially, WOM behavior is more emotion-driven responses (Sundaram, Mitra, and Webster, 1998). Therefore, vindictive WOM behavior is more likely to occur when the emotions are not handled properly. In addition, Kau and Loh (2006) stated that dissatisfied customers who do not directly complain to the firm about their negative experiences may not only engage in vindictive word of mouth behavior, but also switch to another brand. Sabharwal, Soch and Kaur (2010) also suggested that dissatisfied non complaints are likely to exit the service provider more easily resulting in brand switching. Bonifield and Cole (2007) identified conciliatory behaviors to include positive WOM, willingness to return to a service provider, and feeling sympathy for the service provider. Blodgett et al. (1993) suggested that when service failure is recovered, positive word of mouth will take place. Voight (2007) revealed that when certain platform is provided for customers to express their feeling regarding their purchase, customer loyalty increases. Proposition 3. Coping strategies lead to either retaliatory responses or conciliatory responses. Proposition 3-1. Disengaging coping strategies are associated with vindictive WOM, brand switching, complaining behavior more than engaging coping strategies. Proposition 3-2. Engaging coping strategies are associated with positive WOM, re-patronage intention, re-purchase intention. Additionally, our model proposes two individual characteristics as moderators: self-efficacy and self-band connection. Especially, those with high self-brand connection are assumed to counter-argue negative brand information in a service failure situation as this concept captures a strong “self”relevant emotive tie between the brand and the consumer (Escalas, 2004). We contend that these consumers would use prior brand knowledge to neglect their negative emotions and make more brand favoring attributions following service failure. Therefore, depending on the the previous connection with the brand performing the service failure, corresponding coping strategy may change. As self-efficacy relates to the belief that an adequate coping response is available, both factors should relate to the strategies consumers use to cope (Sujan et al., 1999). Proposition 4. Individual characteristics such as self-efficacy and self-brand connection moderates the relationships between negative emotions and coping strategies. Conclusions This paper integrates a broad range of literature into a conceptual framework that delineates consumer coping strategies in a service failure and recovery context. In so doing, the model establishes clear categories for classifying negative emotions consumers experience in a service failure situation into testable elements, and it is argued that although the concept of coping is not a simple one, it should be central to any examination of the service failure and recovery phenomenon. Also, the proposed model considers where marketers’recovery efforts should be directed by describing the ways in which consumers cope with a service failure. How a firm responds to its customers when a service failure occurs can say more about that firm than any other customer interaction. If handled well, it can cultivate emotionally intense relational outcomes. However, if the firm handles the situation badly, it may cause highly negative reactions with customers taking their feedback to online reviews and social media conversations in a way that can seriously damage the firm’s reputation. Future research is needed to empirically test and extend the proposed model. Further empirical research in a particular service setting would advance marketing research as well as be of great managerial significance.

Recently, a television commercial by the Japanese tire manufacturer Autoway went viral on the Internet and received more than 3 million hits on YouTube. The advertisement, which depicts a car driver’s encounter with a grisly figure during a snowstorm, is preceded by a health warning: "Not for the faint of heart. We shall not be liable for any injuries, illness, and damages claimed to be caused by watching the contents." The popularity of this commercial, which explicitly points to its fear-inducing message, attests to the fact that fear appeals in advertising can draw attention. An area where fear appeals are particularly prevalent is social marketing. According to Kotler, Roberto, and Lee (2002), social marketing can be used to improve health, prevent injuries, protect the environment, and promote community involvement. Many of these issues, e.g., cancer screening, seat belt use, environmental pollution, or organ donations, are linked to negative consequences based on the action or inaction of consumers, which consequently lend themselves to fear appeals in advertising. Fear has been used in social marketing campaigns for various issues, such as road safety (Transport Accident Commission, 2002) or smoking (DeJong & Hoffman, 2000), as it can enhance the effectiveness of advertising but also lead to unintended side effects (Hastings, Steed, & Webb, 2004). While the literature has focused on the effectiveness of fear appeals, the effect of scary advertisements or public service announcements on consumers’ perceptions of other commercials surrounding them has been often overlooked. Social marketers might successfully use fear appeals in public service announcements, but the same advertisements could have an adverse effect on the effectiveness of the commercials surrounding them. In this study, we will investigate the carryover effects of public service announcements using fear appeals. Specifically, the goal of this research is to study the effects of fear appeals on the evaluation of commercials that follow.The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. First, we will give an overview of the influence advertisers have on the scheduling of commercials. In the following section, the literature on advertising context effects is reviewed and a hypothesis regarding the effects of fear-inducing public service announcements on the evaluation of subsequent commercials is developed. After the methodology section, the results of a laboratory experiment testing the hypothesis are presented and discussed.

The multiplicity of channels and the ubiquitous access to product information represent major service innovations that new technologies have incorporated into the purchase process. This research analyzes how consumer and seller recommendations affect the consumer’s purchase decision and confidence in a multichannel service context based on an online-offline sequence.

A URC, which is a Ubiquitous Robot Companion, provides services to users in ubiquitous computing environments and has advantage of simplifying robot's hardware and software by distributing the complicated functionality of robots to other system. In this paper, we propose SOWL, which is a software architecture for URC robots and a mixed word of SOMAR and CAWL. SOWL keeps the advantages of URC and it also has the loosely-coupled characteristics. Moreover it makes it easy to develop of URC robot software. The proposed architecture is composed of 4 layers: device software, robot software, robot application, and end user layer. Developers of the each layer is able to build software suitable for their requirements by combining software modules in the lower layer. SOWL consists of SOMAR and CAWL engine. SOMAR, which is a middleware for the execution of device software and robot software, is based on service-oriented architecture(SOA) for robot software. CAWL engine is a system to process CAWL which is a context-aware workflow language. SOWL is able to provide a layered architecture for the execution of a robot software. It also makes it possible for developers of the each layer to build module-based robot software.