Experiencing defects: the moderating role of severity and warranty coverage on quality perceptions

Abstract

PurposeThis study investigates two moderators of the effects of manufacturers' recovery efforts following a product defect on customers' perceptions of product quality: the severity of the product defect and whether the recovery efforts were covered under warranty or not.Design/methodology/approachA total of 478 USA customers who purchased a new car from a cooperating manufacturer participated in a survey. Customers reported the most important product defect (if any) the customers had experienced with the customers' vehicle during the past year. Three linear regressions (OLS) were used to test the proposed hypotheses.FindingsDefect severity moderates the effects of recovery efforts on quality perceptions. The well-known recovery effect occurs only for product defects of minor severity. Experiencing a severe product defect damages the customers' perceptions of product quality even if the product defect is completely fixed. Double deviations (failed recovery of a product defect) do not damage quality perceptions for defects of minor severity. Finally, warranty coverage of repairs can attenuate the adverse effects of a failed recovery of severe defects on customers' quality perceptions. Additionally, only non-complainers who have experienced a severe product defect correspond to the prevailing conceptualization of an at-risk customer group.Originality/valueDespite the pervasiveness of product defects, research on the effects of experiencing product defects on customers' product quality perceptions is scarce. Furthermore, the authors' findings reconcile inconsistent results and provide a more nuanced understanding of the well-known recovery and double-deviation effects. Finally, the role of warranty coverage in the recovery process as a buffer for customers' perceptions of product quality is novel.