Thank You, But No Thank You – Emotional Responses to Preferential Treatment
From priority services and exclusive offers, retailers use preferential treatment in promotions, to reward loyal customers and recover from service failure. This preferential treatment satisfies the very human need consumers have for status and distinction, and retailers expect that grateful customers will reciprocate this treatment with greater loyalty, positive word-of-mouth and increased purchase intention. Most research regarding preferential treatment has focused on these positive impacts, supporting the use of this tool without reservation.
However preferential treatment by necessity involves giving something to one customer that is denied to another. This inequity can leave the rewarded consumers worried about being negatively judged or retaliated against, resulting in feelings of guilt or embarrassment. While previous research has shown the possibility of negative emotional responses to preferential treatment, none have explored in depth what triggers these responses or the impact they have on the relationship between the impacted customers and brands. This study seeks to address this, to better explain customers’ complex emotional responses to preferential treatment that disadvantages others.
Methodology
This research involved three experimental studies and one pilot study. The pilot study, conducted via online survey (n=209), confirmed the premise of the experimental studies by showing that customers are aware that their preferential treatment disadvantages other customers. The experimental studies measured responses to a variety of imagined service scenarios via online survey. Responses were assessed regarding the participant’s attitude towards the service provider, as well as their experienced shame, embarrassment and guilt.
The first experimental study (n=117) examined reactions to being rewarded for loyalty with higher priority service in a busy restaurant, with one condition first confronting participants with a family waiting for service patiently (low harm) while in the other a family was consoling
a crying child complaining of hunger (high harm). The second study (n=170) repeated the scenario of the first, but participants were additionally presented with another scenario that assessed how likely they were to donate to a charity after dinning in the restaurant to measure engagement with guilt reducing coping strategies. The third study (n=121) explored the same situation, but in this case the participants were receiving preferential treatment for no particular reason rather than earnt through loyalty as with the previous scenarios.
Key findings
- When preferential treatment is perceived to cause harm to others, it triggers negative emotional reactions in customers.
- These negative emotional reactions increased negative attitudes towards the service provider, decreasing brand loyalty.
- When the preferential treatment is perceived to be earned (loyalty rewards, ect) this negative response is influenced by feelings of shame, rather than guilt or embarrassment.
- When the preferential treatment is unearned however, negative attitudes are influenced via embarrassment, with a lessened (but still significant) impact of shame.
- Because preferential treatment is causing shame (an externally focused emotion), consumers are likely to deploy avoidance coping mechanisms, avoiding contact and minimising exposure to others (including the service provider). This is in contrast with trying to assuage guilt (which is more internal) after the fact through positive actions, such as donating to charity.
Recommendations
Given that the perception of harm can trigger negative emotional responses, managers should consider how to reduce harm caused to other customers when developing preferential treatment programs. This might involve rewarding with new services and features, rather than gating existing features behind loyalty programs. Harm can also be reduced by developing preferential treatment programs that do not simply benefit loyal or high-status customers, but also provide services to specific groups that would benefit most from prioritisation; such as families with young babies, the elderly or impaired and pregnant women. This would not only increase the loyalty of these unexpected recipients, but also increase the perception of the business’s moral excellence, reducing perceptions of harm for other prioritised customers.
As the negative feelings of shame arise from feeling judged by others, it may also be necessary to redirect the customers focus from “others” to “self” by emphasising the customer’s own effort in the achievement of the preferential treatment. For example, rewarding a customer with
a personal training session for consistently exercising at a gym can invoke a sense of pride and accomplishment and focus their attention on their own personal experience. Shame might also be diminished by removing the audience for the preferential treatment, providing this service in a private setting through digital technology or VIP areas.
These findings highlight the complex emotional responses that customers have to preferential treatment. While this study focused on negative reactions, it should not be suggested that customers will always experience negative emotions to preferential treatment. Indeed, past research suggests that preferential treatment is a powerful tool to reward loyal customers and attract new ones. Rather, these findings demonstrate that managers should be mindful of the potential for unexpected negative moral emotions to arise when advantaged customers become aware of any harm caused to other customers.
Researcher
More information
The research article is also available on eprints.