| Back to Top | Helen's Homepage |
Three years ago I visited my brother and sister in law, Mark and Flo, in Colombus, Ohio, where they were living at the time. I wanted to take them out to dinner at a restaurant of their choice, and they decided on the Olive Garden, one of their favorite places in the area. They had been there many times before and were very keen on Olive Garden’s big salads, warm bread with melted butter, and pasta dishes.
I had never been to an Olive Garden before, but had heard great things about it from friends in my hometown, and of course, from my brother and his wife. On page 209 of our textbook, Figure 11.4 depicts a Service-Quality Model, which shows the requirements for delivering high service quality. This model identifies “gaps” in the process, which can cause unsuccessful delivery of service. I will be referring to this model to examine our experience during this meal.
Because Mark and Flo were frequent customers of the Olive Garden, past experiences resulted in their high expectations of service. They knew the restaurant well, had always experienced high quality service (both good food and being served well), and had never heard anything bad via word of mouth from friends or coworkers about the place. Having been to the Olive Garden in Colombus, or anywhere else, I had set my expectations on word of mouth communication, and my own particular notion of good service in a restaurant. Now let me explain what happened during our visit. We were seated quickly, although the restaurant was extremely busy. Our waiter introduced himself, took our orders, brought out our drinks, bread and butter, and a large salad for us to share while we awaited our main courses. We dug in, were very much enjoying the food, when I almost ate quite a large fly, which was in the salad.
One could describe both my brother and I as “passives;” that is, we were brought up not to complain and would usually do nothing. Flo is a bit more assertive, but very reasonably so. I would say she fits in somewhere between “voicer” and “irate.” She urged me to complain, offered to complain for me, and then agreed to keep quiet when I said I would say something at the end of the meal, being very hungry, and not wanting to deal with anything other than getting food in my mouth. The restaurant was very busy, our waiter obviously had too many tables than he should have had, and I told her I “felt bad” complaining because he seemed really stressed out. We all basically stopped eating the salad, and waited for our main dishes. These came out shortly, and a few minutes into eating, I found another beetle-looking bug (smaller than the fly) in my vegetables. And then, Flo found a hair in her pasta. By this time, none of us was in a very good mood. I had told the waiter when he finally made it around to the table about both of the bugs in my food, and showed him the beetle on my plate, and Flo had showed him the hair. He apologized profusely, took our two plates and said he was going to go back to the kitchen and see if he could bring us out new dishes. The three of us were quite forlorn, but we waited, thinking perhaps they would not make us pay for those two dishes.
When our food came back out, the manager of the restaurant brought it. He apologized to us also, saying that the lettuce for the salads came to the restaurant pre- washed, and that because of the high volume of customers that night, the cooks were having a hard time of it, and not being able to pay as much attention to the preparation as normal. We were all quite sure now that the bill would not include Flo’s and my order, since the manager had been brought to attention of our problems with their service. Neither of us really touched our new meals, and we asked for the bill, thinking that we had all been very patient and understanding. The bill did not exclude either of our meals, but by this point we were beyond complaining, at just wanted to get out of there. So we paid, and left. Our perceived service did not meet up to our notion of expected service, thus illustrating a very large “gap,” which resulted in unsuccessful delivery of service from our point of view. The manager had obviously thought that with his personal apology and brief explanation of the bad service that we would be appeased and would fully understand and “forgive” his restaurant’s mistakes. The management’s perception of our (the consumer) expectations was a bit off, thus showing a gap between consumer expectation and management perception. As a result of this “gap,” Mark and Flo did not return to the Olive Garden in the year before they moved away from Columbus, and I have never been back to an Olive Garden, although I would be open to going again if a fellow diner would so choose. Asking Mark and Flo recently whether or not they’ve been to any Olive Garden since, they said yes. They were living in Bangor, Maine, a more “limited market” for restaurants, and they fully enjoyed their experiences in Bangor’s Olive Garden. Flo explained to me, however, that she would not go back to Columbus’ Olive Garden, and has “spread the word” amongst family and friends of her bad service that particular time. I, too, have told the story to a few people. My brother said, “It’s food.”
Moving on to the topic of service recovery, all three of us had higher expectations of the outcome of our complaints, and believed that we should have been compensated with more than an apology from the manager to the restaurant. In fact, all three of us agreed that in the least, we should have been given some sort of discount on the bill because of what happened. Both Mark and I thought that the two plates should have been free, while Flo thought the restaurant should have invited us to dinner, or have given us a gift certificate for a free meal. Would this have influenced Mark and Flo’s decision to return to the Olive Garden in Columbus? Flo says yes, while Mark says he probably would have gone back anyway, if it weren’t for Flo. I think that if I had been given a free meal, or a gift of a free meal, I would have gone back as well.
Judging Olive Garden’s “fairness” in terms of interaction, we all agreed that we were treated politely, with care, respect and honesty. The manager explained the reason for the bad service, and the contaminated plates were taken away and replaced. Our complaints were dealt with what we saw as swiftness, considering the amount of customers in the restaurant. Thus, we agreed that procedurally, we were dealt with fairly. Our waiter took our complaint, dealt with it how he was told to do so (by telling the manager), and the manager came to talk with us and offer new servings of what we had ordered. Finally, we all agreed that we did not receive fair “outcome,” as I have already explained. And because of this Olive Garden has lost two faithful clients, and one potential faithful client. When our personal needs require us to eat Italian-type food, none of us think Olive Garden! As far as all three of us are concerned, the “outcome” fairness was the form which dominated our thoughts of the restaurant, though if the manager or waiter had been rude and disrespectful, I am quite sure that none of us would consider giving Olive Garden, as a national chain, a second chance.
I’m not sure that our complaints caused any type of effect upon the organization. I think that if we had protested more and demanded not to pay, then maybe there would have been a more positive outcome for us and for the organization. I suppose they have a certain policy for these types of occurrences, and this policy was adhered to that night. I do not agree with this policy, and do not feel that it is beneficial to the organization. I think that all “response” types, that is, all the people who fit into the four categories, should be dealt with in the same manner. I think that whether or not someone actively complains, that if the server (s) are aware of an instance of bad service even if the customer has not said anything, that the customer should be compensated in the same way as one who is actively complaining. This way, the organization can convert those who are passive into those who voice their complaints, and are happy with the fairness of the outcome of their complaint. In the same manner, they can avoid converting people into “irates,” or “activists,” by solving the problem before it develops into something more.
Service recovery for Olive Garden in this scenario would have to have been dealt with at the time of bad service. Once we walked out the door, without being fairly compensated (in our minds), our opinions were pretty much set in stone. The three of us had all worked in restaurants at one point, and all believed that outcome “fairness” entitled us to either a smaller bill, or a gift certificate. We all still hold the same view. There really is no good excuse for three mishaps at one table on any night, and the management did not perform adequate service recovery and lost three customers.
The scenario for them that night was: three customers who complained by voicing their dissatisfaction with the quality of service but not demanding anything in return. They were aware that we were not satisfied, yet did not attempt to reimburse us for the bad service, or offer any type of compensation. Perhaps if we had taken it a step further and demanded compensation, they would have acquiesced. Maybe this is their strategy; to deal with different levels of complaints in distinct ways. This is what I disagree with, as I have previously stated. The manager should have offered us compensation, even though we did not bring it up.
| Back to Top | Helen's Homepage |