Cultural Managment / Barker and Hartel 2004 Genral

Intercultural service encounters: An exploratory study of customer experiences

Sunita Barker and Charmine E. J. Härtel

The Authors

Sunita Barker and Charmine E. J. Härtel are both at the Deakin Business School, Centre for Business Research, Victoria, Australia.

Abstract

Intercultural contact occurs on a daily basis across all facets of life, and is reflective of Australia’s multicultural society. This trend is observed in many Western industrialised nations and has contributed to a growing body of research and literature in the field of managing cultural diversity. While much of this research is focused on the internal context of the workplace, relatively little attention has been given to the impact of culture on the service provider and customer interface. In an effort to shed some light on the service experiences of culturally diverse customers, a series of exploratory interviews were conducted. The findings suggest that on the basis of service provider behaviors (both verbal and nonverbal), culturally diverse customers perceive they are the recipients of inequitable service and consequently experience low levels of satisfaction.

Keywords

Service encounter; Cultural diversity; Communication; Discrimination

Introduction

Over the last few decades Australia has witnessed the settlement of various cultural groups. According to the 2001 Census of Population and Housing, just over one fifth (22%) of Australia’s population were born overseas and 15% of the population speak a language other than English at home. Coinciding with a culturally diverse population, Australia has also enjoyed phenomenal growths in the service sector, a trend mirrored across many Western industrialised nations. According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics (2003), service industries have surpassed the manufacturing sector in terms of employment, number of businesses and gross value added. It is therefore no exaggeration that Australia’s prosperity rests in part, on the success of the service sector.

The influx of immigrants and a growing service sector have each attracted scholarly interest. Nevertheless, the two streams of literature have largely developed independently, and therefore provide limited consideration to the growth of intercultural service encounters. Despite growing awareness of the purchasing power of ethnic minorities (Pires & Stanton, 2000), service encounters as experienced by culturally diverse customers remain largely under-investigated. The key objective of this paper, therefore, is to shed some light on this issue and identify the relationship between service provider behaviors (verbal and non-verbal) and customer satisfaction. This paper will proceed with an overview of the theoretical background, followed by a discussion of the methodology and findings.

The Dyadic Intercultural Service Encounter

Interactions between persons account for a large part of service provision. Commonly referred to as a service encounter, these exchanges reflect “a period of time during which a consumer directly interacts with a service” (Shostak, 1985: 243). As opposed to service relationships, service encounters tend to be short in duration, dyadic and assume limited prior contact between service provider and customer. Limited prior contact presupposes limited psychological interaction, which in turn elevates the role of observable cues to ascribed stereotypes (Tajfel & Turner, 1979). Thus, in the absence of physical components, service providers (and their behaviors) often become the customers’ source of cognitive and emotional evaluation (Mano & Oliver, 1993; Rafaeli, 1993) in determining their level of satisfaction.

The Multi-Dimensional Role of the Service Provider

As the customers first point of contact, the service provider is often referred to as the ‘face’ of the organization. The specifics of their role is normally embodied within a ‘script’, that stipulates the how, when, what and where of emotional displays and exists at the societal, occupational and organizational levels (Mano & Oliver, 1993; Maslach, 1982). While these scripts vary across organizations, a common thread underlying all is the need to meet and / or exceed customer expectations. In other words, given the emotional nature of service encounters (Härtel, Hsu & Boyle, 2002), the ultimate goal of the service provider is to ensure that customers are left with the positive emotion of satisfaction (Härtel, Barker & Baker, 1999; Mano & Oliver, 1993). However, several factors may impede on this positive outcome, including the provider’s attitude and behavior towards culturally diverse customers.

Service providers evaluate customers based on a range of attributes including appearance and communication. These evaluations are facilitated by preexisting attitudes, which direct behavior. This linkage between attitudes and behavior is examined by a number of well-established theories. Central to these theories is that the evaluation or classification of others is commonly based on

predetermined categories that have been established and reinforced throughout an individual’s life experiences and are often of a stereotypical nature (Hamilton & Trolier, 1986). For example, according to the Similarity Attraction Paradigm (Byrne, 1971; Riordan & McFarland Shore, 1997), interpersonal attraction occurs where commonalities exist. Therefore, it can be argued that service providers are more attracted to customers who match their cultural profile (Härtel & Fujimoto, 2000). Likewise, Social Identity Theory (Ashworth & Mael, 1989; Tajfel & Turner, 1979) suggests that a service provider’s perception of who they are based on cognitive and social evaluations can determine whom they seek to serve.

Both theories assist in understanding an individuals’ propensity to seek and sustain intercultural contact. Generally speaking, pre-existing positive attitudes towards cultural diversity may incline some individuals to form and sustain intercultural friendships, while pre-existing negative attitudes may discourage other persons from pursuing such intercultural contacts (Härtel & Fujimoto, 2000; Powers & Ellison, 1995). In this paper, we argue that a providers’ attitude towards culturally diverse customers is communicated through verbal and non-verbal channels, which are in turn observed and evaluated by customers in determining future patronage and level of satisfaction.

Communication and Discrimination in Intercultural Service Encounters

The study of communication is frequently separated into verbal (linguistic) and non-verbal (non-linguistic) components. Both forms of communication reflect an individual’s attitudes, feelings and emotions (Dimbelby & Burton, 1998; Hargie, 1997; Hart & Morry, 1996). Language represents a channel for conveying verbal behavior, including the transmission of information, ideas and beliefs, while nonverbal behavior is multi-channel and ideal for expressing attitudes, emotions and identity (Gallois & Callan, 1997). Despite the fact that culture impacts on norms, rules, symbols and meanings (Collier & Thomas, 1988; Gudykunst et al, 1988) research suggests that there is a universal recognition of expressed emotion, particularly in relation to facial expressions (Ekman, 1971, 1992; Ekman et al, 1987).

In the context of the service encounter, both parties are provided with an opportunity to communicate significant amounts of information about themselves, both consciously and unconsciously (Ambady & Rosenthal, 1993). The content of what is expressed during this time is influenced by a number of variables and is also dependent on the stage of interaction. Prior to interaction, both parties bring with them their unique ‘makeup’ comprising demographic variables such as race and gender as well as attitudes, beliefs, dispositions, knowledge and previous experiences. This ‘makeup’ is unique to each person and represents a framework from which individuals direct and interpret communication. During interactions, both service provider and customer engage in an exchange process, where the ‘makeup’ unique to each individual intersects. Throughout this time both parties

search for a shared belief space and linguistic system in order to reduce uncertainty (Berger, 1987), as failure to do so generally leads to miscommunication (Varonis & Gass, 1985; White & Härtel, 2004). Once the interaction is finalised both parties go through a process of attributing causes to outcomes and satisfaction.

Attributes are essentially determined by the consistency, distinctiveness and consensus of an individual’s behaviors (Hargie, 1997). For example, research has shown that accented speech tends to be correlated with lower status (Brennan & Brennan, 1981) and irritation on the part of the receiver (Fayer & Krasinski, 1987). Therefore, “speech cues can be used by listeners to make inferences regarding an individual’s personal characteristics, social group membership and psychological states” (Ryan & Giles, 1982:2).

Aside from making inferences about others, communication is also used as a tool to express one’s like or dislike towards another by converging or diverging from the other person’s communication style (Giles, 1973). For example, failure to communicate a polite attitude will not only be assessed as the absence of that attitude but the opposite, the possession of an aggressive attitude (Brown & Levinson, 1987). Discrimination represents one of the driving forces behind this diverging style of communication (Ayoko, Härtel & Callan, 2003). While federal (Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission Act 1986) and state (Anti Discrimination Act 1991) legislation seeks to eradicate explicit acts of discrimination in Australia, a move towards more implicit forms of discrimination (Wittenbrink, Judd & Park, 1997) creates a legal void. Thus, although role scripts serve to control explicit forms of service provider behaviors, one cannot dismiss the possibility that their prejudicial views are exposed (McCormick et al, 1986) through more implicit non-verbal means.

The extent to which discrimination penetrates the communication styles of service providers is an area that requires further investigation. However, the purpose of this paper is to focus on the customers’ perspective in relation to service provider behaviors they perceive to be indicative of intolerance towards cultural diversity.

Methodology

To obtain an insight into the service experiences of culturally diverse customers, a number of exploratory interviews were conducted in the year 2000. Essentially, interviews provide an ideal means for capturing personal experiences and the meaning people bring to them (Denzin & Lincoln, 1998). The interviews were semi-structured to provide an opportunity for exploring issues identified by the interviewees, while maintaining a certain degree of structure. The interviewees were chosen at random from varying service locations that included an interna-

tional airport, financial institution and a retail store all within the vicinity of Brisbane City (Queensland).

Given the focus of this research, emphasis was placed on targeting customers of non- Anglo-Celtic / Saxon appearance. The interviewers were instructed to approach every fourth non Anglo-Celtic / Saxon customer (judged by appearance). A total of 30 individuals consented to participate in the study, representing a response rate of 65%. Apart from four Indigenous Australians, the remaining participants were immigrants from Non-English Speaking Backgrounds (NESB). Participants were fairly mixed across the age groups and female participants slightly outnumbered male participants.

Two qualified researchers conducted the interviews that lasted anywhere from 15 minutes to an hour. Interviewers used a semi-structured interview guide, which opened with a standard question (“have you ever experienced a service encounter where you felt you were treated differently because of your race”?). The questions that followed concentrated on specific provider behaviors and their implications for customer satisfaction. Permission was sought and granted from all participants in relation to the use of a voice recorder.

Results and Analysis

All interviews were transcribed in order to identify main themes that were subsequently discussed, analyzed and compared by both interviewers. The issue of inter-rater reliability was addressed by requesting each interviewer to independently identify key themes specifically relating to provider behaviors that customers view as being characteristic of inequitable service treatment. Upon the completion of this process, both researchers compared results and found little variation. Subsequently, the results were summarized into four categories as outlined in Table 1.

Overall, the interviewees were very open to the questions asked of them and often took the initiative to expand on their experiences by drawing on other incidences. Several commented on the regularity with which they are confronted with inequitable or sub-standard service and noted they had grown accustomed to it. For example, one interviewee said “it is something I deal with every day, I have become so familiar with it that I don’t notice it anymore”.

Interviewees often used a comparison based approach to both describe their experience and determine whether inequitable service was imparted. For example, “If you ask a question like ‘what was that’ because you didn’t hear them, for a normal Australian they would just repeat it, but for someone of a different color they would come across more annoyed because they feel you are in their country and you should understand”. However, other interviewees showed difficulty in defining specific provider behaviors that they perceived to be inequitable. For example, “it is difficult to describe, part of it is what you pick up through experience, and those things cannot be taught by a teacher”. This phenomenon supports the discrimination literature, suggesting a shift from overt to subtler forms of discrimination (Franco & Maass, 1999).

The majority of interviewees identified the voice of the service provider as central in displaying their tolerance towards culturally diverse customers. In particular, there was a general perception that service providers associate a customers’ accent with an inability to speak or understand English. This conclusion was drawn based on various aspects of the provider’s voice including tone, speed and volume as demonstrated by the following quote “I just find that after I open my mouth, because of my accent, people will try and talk more loudly and definitely slowly”. Most interviewees were offended by such behaviors, resulting in various remarks such as “I do understand English” and “I don’t have a hearing problem”. Interestingly, interviewees with an excellent command of English experienced similar provider behaviors, suggesting that skin color is predictive of differential service treatment.

The interviewees also frequently referred to the service providers’ heightened suspicion or lack of trust displayed towards them. This takes the form of regularly checking handbags or following customers around the shop. For example, “when you walk in a shop, particularly if you’re browsing, they’ll come and ask you, do you want help and you say ‘no thank you’ and they take a couple of steps back and just linger”.

Another area noted by interviewees is the service provider’s efforts to refrain from interacting with them. Referred to here as ‘avoidance’, it is most often displayed through body language and eye contact. The three quotes that follow are representative of customer experiences. “I find that sometimes when you go into shops and you are waiting to be served, people will often overlook me” and “I often feel invisible when I am waiting in queues and am next in line” or “there are cases

where you see people pretending to be busy with their work, it is about race, it is about choosing who your next customer will be.”

An overall lack of effort on the part of the service provider into ensuring the customer is satisfied was another recurring theme identified through the interviews. For example, “I notice this a lot, I don’t know if it is instinct or what, you see how they treat white people and when it comes to us it’s like they drop a notch in their service”. A feeling of unfriendliness and a lack of interest was also noted. For example, “you see them with other people, they are more warmer, more friendlier” and “there is no small talk, like asking how is your son doing or whatever, and even with people that you see quite often you don’t have that kind of contact”.

All interviewees were asked how they responded to their service experiences and what impact it had on their satisfaction. In terms of customer reactions to inequitable service, typical responses include ignoring what took place, responding directly to the service provider, lodging a formal complaint or discontinuing future patronage as indicated by one customer “you just feel so uncomfortable, you don’t want to go back in there again”. While some are direct and forward in their reaction to inequitable service, such as “You’ve had your education, been to uni for so long and you go to a restaurant where they use sign language on you to get their message across. The way I look at it, by ignoring it you don’t help them. I used to ignore it but I don’t stand for that crap anymore”, others are more reluctant to react as shown by the following comment “on other occasions you would have to spell your name or whatever, you know people have no patience, or you know they would say E but you said B, and you know often I will just dismiss it”.

Several interviewees expressed feelings of ‘embarrassment’ and ‘shame’ especially when subjected to such treatment in front of their peers and families, and others talked about feeling ‘small’ and ‘inferior’. Overall, most interviewees indicated a general hesitancy or unwillingness to return to these organizations as indicated by the following comment “I made up my mind that I won’t ever go in there again”.

Included in the sample were four Indigenous Australians of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander descent. Interestingly, their experiences were similar to those described by immigrant Australians, thereby suggesting that (history aside) skin color is a key predictor to differential service treatment. An Aboriginal woman described a recent incident involving a simple task of ordering a pizza for herself and a friend who happened to be an immigrant Australian of NESB. “Last night we ordered a pizza by phone, and it’s just that I rang ‘cause you wouldn’t be able to tell what color I am over the phone and got her to get the pizza, cause she’s only got the accent”. She explained that their choice of action was based on past experiences where color and accent were influencing factors in the quality of service they received.

At this stage it is important to note that even though this research has focused on inequitable service experiences, interviewees also relayed positive service experiences. This supports research showing that some individuals (particularly those who are open to diversity, stable, conscientious and extroverts) are more suited to front-line roles than others (Bowen, 1996; Furnham & Coveney, 1996).

Conclusion

Cultural diversity is a business reality and an important issue to be considered in the acquisition and maintenance of a growing segment of customers. While exploratory in nature, the results presented in this paper provide evidence that inequitable service is delivered to culturally diverse customer groups. This in turn highlights the need for organizations to monitor the quality of intercultural service encounters.

Given the relationship between service provider behaviors, customer satisfaction and organizational outcomes, the findings are indicative of a need to modify human resource management practices. In particular, the recruitment and selection of service providers on the basis of desired customer service behaviors (CSB) is beneficial, especially when these behaviors are indicative of their tolerance towards, and appreciation of cultural diversity.

From a training perspective, it is argued that traditional diversity training programs (that match behaviors to various situations) will fail to overcome negative stereotypical beliefs and prejudicial attitudes (Martin & Adams, 1999) and instead often produce negative reactions (Nemetz & Christensen, 1996). As an alternative, a multi-faceted approach incorporating deeply embedded stereotypes and desired CSB (both verbal and non-verbal) is likely to achieve better results.

In view of current world events, the urgency for cross cultural understanding and appreciation at the societal, organizational and individual level is paramount. Thus, the findings presented here justify the continued pursuit of research into diversity issues and their solutions in the customer service area.

References

Ambady, N. & Rosenthal, R. (1993). Half a minute: Predicting teacher evaluations from thin slices of non verbal behavior and physical attractiveness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64 (3): 431-441.

Anti Discrimination Act 1991 (Qld).

Australian Bureau of Statistics (2001). Census of Population and Housing: A snapshot of Australia. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing.

Australian Bureau of Statistics (2003). Yearbook Australia 2003, Canberra: Australian Government Publishing: Cat 1301.

Ayoko, O., Härtel, C. E. J. & Callan, V. J. (2003). Resolving the puzzle of productive and destructive conflict in culturally heterogeneous workgroups: A communication accommodation theory approach. International Journal of Conflict Management, 13 (2): 165-195.

Ashworth, B. E. & Mael, F. (1989). Social identity theory and the organisation.

Academy of Management Review, 141: 20-39.

Berger, C. (1987). Communication uncertainty. In M. Roloff & G. Miller (Eds.). Interpersonal processes: New directions in communication research. Newbury Park: Sage.

Bowen, D. E. (1996). Market-focused HRM in service organizations: Satisfying internal and external customers. Journal of Market-Focused Management, 1: 31-47.

Brennan, E. M. & Brennan, J. S. (1981). Accent scaling and language attitudes: Reactions to Mexican American English speech. Language and Speech, 24 (3): 207-221.

Brown, P. & Levinson, S. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Byrne, D. (1971). The Attraction Paradigm. New York: Academic Press.

Collier, M. J. & Thomas, M. (1988). Cultural identity: An interpretive perspective. In Kim, Y. Y. & Gudykunst, W. B. (Eds.), Theories in intercultural communication, 99-122. Newbury Park: Sage.

Denzin, N. K. & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.), (1998). Strategies of Qualitative Inquiry. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Dimbleby, R. & Burton, G. (1998). More than words: An introduction to communication. New York: Routledge.

Ekman, P. (1971). Universals and cultural differences in facial expressions of emotion. In J. K. Cole (Ed.), Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, 19: 207–283. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.

Ekman, P. (1992). Are there basic emotions? Psychological Review, 99: 550 – 553.

Ekman, P., Friesen, W.V., O’Sullivan, M., Diacoayanni-Tarlatziz, L., Krause, R., Pitcairn, T., Scherer, K., Chan, A., Heider, K., Ayan LeCompte, W., Ricci-Bitti, P. E. & Tomita, M. (1987). Universals and cultural differences in the judgments of facial expressions of emotion, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53: 712–717.

Fayer, J. M. & Krasinski, E. (1987). Native and non-native judgements of intelligibility and irritation. Language Learning, 37: 313-326.

Franco, F. M. & Maass, A. (1999). Intentional control over prejudice: When the choice of the measure matters. European Journal of Social Psychology, 29: 445468.

Furnham, A. & Coveney, R. (1996). Personality and customer service. Psychological Reports, 79: 675-681.

Gallois, C. & Callan, V. J. (1997). Communication and culture: A guide for practice. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Giles, H. (1973). Accent mobility: A model and some data. Anthropological Linguistics, 15: 87-105.

Gudykunst, W. B., Ting-Toomey, S. & Chua, E. (1988). Culture and interpersonal communication. London: Sage.

Hamilton, D. L. & Trolier, T. K. (1986). Stereotypes and stereotyping: An overview of the cognitive approach. In Dovidio, J. F. & Gaertner, S. L. (Eds.), Prejudice, discrimination, and racism, 127-163. Orlando: Academic Press Inc.

Hargie, O. D. W. (Ed.), (1997). The handbook of communication skills (2 edition). London: Routledge.

Hart, A. J. & Morry, M.M. (1996). Nonverbal behaviour, race and attitude attributions. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 32: 165 – 179.

Härtel, C.E.J., Barker, S. & Baker, N. (1999). A model for predicting the effects of employee-customer interactions on consumer attitudes, intentions, and behaviors. The role of emotional intelligence in service encounters. Australian Journal of Communication, 26 (2): 77-87.

Härtel, C. E. J. & Fujimoto, Y. (2000). Diversity is not a problem to be managed by organizations but openness to perceived dissimilarity is. Journal of Australian and New Zealand Academy of Management, 6 (1): 14-27.