I I

Industrial Buyer
Complaining Behavior
Alvin Williams C.P. Rao
Many areas of household consumer behavior research were
extended to study organizational buyer behavior in the recent
years. However, one exception is the buyer dissatisfaction and
complaining behavior area. This article discusses the various
conceptual aspects of organizational buyer complaining be-
havior. A model of buyer complaining behavior is proposed
and some theoretical portulates are formulated f or additional
research.
Comparat i vel y little attention has been given to the
areas of satisfaction, dissatisfaction, and complaining
behavi or of industrial buyers [17]. The limited amount of
research in this area is inconsistent with the large vol ume
of business activities that are classified as industrial pur-
chases. Ironically, the majority of the research efforts in
the industrial buyi ng area have emphasized the single
purchase act itself and not those variables prior or sub-
sequent to the act that may be significant [ 12, 15]. Prob-
lems encount ered subsequent to purchase should be of
primary concern because of the probabl e negative impact
this will have on future patronage.
Efforts have been made to study consumer satisfac-
Address correspondance to: C. P. Rao, College of Busi ness Admi ni st rat i on,
Uni versi t y of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR 72701.
Industrial Marketing Management 9, 299- 304 (1980)
Elsevier North Holland, Inc., 1980
52 Vanderbilt Ave. , New York, New York 10017
tion, dissatisfaction, and complaining behavior, and the
results have been encouraging [2, 7]. The increased at-
tention to this area was prompt ed by heightened con-
sumer discontent and unrest with product performance
and their feeling of helplessness in the marketplace. Al-
though no evidence exists of a similar phenomenon in the
industrial marketing arena, it is predicted that regulatory
agencies will eventually protect organizational buyers
and organizational buyer advocat es will emerge [13].
Rel at i vel y little conceptual or empirical attention has
been given to the concept of consumer satisfaction in the
marketing literature. Even less attention has been given
to understanding and explaining satisfaction among or-
ganizational buyers. The notion of consumer satisfaction
has been studied within the context of pol i cy planning
and evaluation, consumer legislation, marketing man-
agement, consumeri sm activities, and theories of con-
sumer behavior. All of these areas have focused on ulti-
mate consumers and not organizational buyers [7].
The need to devel op and conceptualize the areas of
satisfaction, dissatisfaction, and complaints of organiza-
tional buyers is growi ng increasingly greater. The impor-
tance of industrial buyi ng behavi or is growi ng in terms of
dollars. The dollar vol ume i nvol ved in industrial buyi ng
and selling is presently greater than that involved in the
sum total of consumer transactions [8]. By 1980, it is
299
0019-8501/80/040299-06/$01. 75
estimated that the dollar vol ume of industrial, reseller,
and government markets combi ned will exceed the gross
national product [6]. These figures give some indication
of the magnitude of the organizational sector and under-
scores the importance of increasing our understanding of
this sector of the economy. The increase in the size of the
organizational markets magnifies the need of marketing
managers in firms whose cust omers are formal organiza-
tions for a wel l -devel oped body of knowl edge about
organizational buyer behavi or.
This increased knowl edge will enhance the fi rms'
ability to be more cust omer-ori ent ed and to i mpl ement
the dictates of the marketing concept. Those industrial
firms who have embraced the marketing concept recog-
nize that cust omer satisfaction is germane to satisfying
organizational goals and to increasing long-run prof-
itability of the firm. It is possi bl e that business firms that
sell to individual and househol d consumers typically
have accept ed the marketing concept more readily than
have firms whose cust omers are other firms, institutions,
and other formal organizations [16]. The lack of respon-
siveness to the marketing concept by some industrial
firms may be due in part to an i ncompl et e and insufficient
knowl edge on whi ch to base cust omer-ori ent ed deci-
sions. Improved knowl edge of dissatisfaction and com-
plaining behavi or al l ows organizational marketers to be
more sensitive to the needs of their cust omers, and at the
same time pinpoints areas of weakness and dictates the
appropriate corrective actions to pursue in handling dis-
satisfaction.
T HE N A T U R E OF
I N D U S T R I A L B U Y E R C O M P L A I N I N G
Minimal evi dence exists in the marketing or purchas-
ing literature about the compl ai ni ng behavi or of organiza-
DR. C. P. RAO is Prof essor of Market i ng, Uni versi t y of Arkansas.
He is a f r equent cont r i but or to vari ous academi c j ournal s i ncl ud-
i ng Journal of Marketi ng Research, Industrial Marketing Man-
agement, Journal of Purchasing and Materials Management,
European Journal of Marketing, Advertising Quarterly (London),
Journal of Business Research, Journal of the Academy of Mar-
keting Science, Indian Administrative and Management Review
(Delhi), and Manager (Athens, Greece).
ALVIN JEROME WI LLI AMS gr aduat ed from t he Uni versi t y of
Sout hern Mi ssi ssi ppi wi t h a B.S. degr ee in Mar ket i ng and t he
Uni versi t y of Ar kansas wi th a Mast ers of Art s degr ee in Market -
ing. Current l y he is a doct or al candi dat e in Mar ket i ng at t he
Uni versi t y of Arkansas, Fayetteville.
3 0 0
tional buyers, or the degree of satisfaction or dissatisfac-
tion experi enced in the process of procuring goods and
services for the organization [17]. This defi ci ency of
information represents a serious gap in our knowl edge
base, whi ch in turn may be affecting industrial marketing
decision-making. The fol l owi ng are some of the pertinent
organizational buyer compl ai ni ng issues:
1. Do organizational buyers complain about some as-
pect of the prepurchase, purchase, or post purchase pro-
cess? It is essential to determine i f complaints arise from
organizational buyers or whet her t hey are unique to
househol d consumers. At present little or no document a-
tion exists to answer this question.
2. If organizational buyers do compl ai n, what do they
compl ai n about? What is the specific nature of their
compl ai nt s? Research is needed to determine whether
t hey compl ai n about product quality, cost, post-sale ser-
vice, terms of sale, speed of delivery, or some other
aspect of the purchasing process. Further attention should
be paid to complaints in particular categories of products
purchased. For exampl e, whi ch of the fol l owi ng
categories of product s/ servi ces do t hey compl ai n about
most often: raw materials, semi manufact ured goods,
component s, subcontracted production services, capital
investment goods, operating supplies, contracted indus-
trial services, contracted professional services, or some
other area. Do the kind or t ype of complaints vary by
product group?
Distinctions should be maintained regarding com-
plaints about services as compared to products. Since
services are intangible, for the most part, one woul d
intuitively expect a greater degree of dissatisfaction, and
thus more complaining.
3. To whom do they complain? Research efforts in this
area should determine i f industrial buyers compl ai n to
specific parties for different t ypes of complaints. For
exampl e, if there is a probl em with product quality or
speed of del i very, to whom woul d the organizational
buyer compl ai n? Woul d it be to the salesperson, sales
manager, or to someone else in the supplying organiza-
tion? Woul d it depend upon the t ype of product or ser-
vi ce? Such research findings could be used to focus and
devel op the complaint-handling skills of individuals in
supplying organizations.
4. What are the determinants of industrial complaining
behavi or? There are obvi ousl y many variables that im-
pact upon the decision by the buyer to compl ai n or not to
compl ai n about some aspect of actual or percei ved dis-
satisfaction with some part of the prepurchase, purchase,
and post purchase process.
In looking at determinants of industrial complaining
behavior, specific attention must be given to the role in
which the buyi ng cent er plays in the decision-making
process. The buyi ng cent er has been defined as all those
individuals and groups who participate in the purchasing
decision-making process, and who share some common
goals and risks arising from the decisions [15]. Each
person represented in the buyi ng cent er for a particular
purchase will have certain levels of expectations, which
are likely to be different. These differences will probably
casue some form of dissatisfaction and thus complaining
within the organization. The nature of this complaining
process within the organization will in part influence the
actions taken by the buyer to handle the problem.
AN ORGANI ZATI ONAL BUYER
COMPLAI NI NG BEHAVI OR MODEL
Since little conceptual or empirical research has been
conduct ed in this area, a purpose of this article is to
propose and develop a model of industrial buyer com-
plaining behavior, using the previously developed
models of consumer complaining behavior as guides.
Models of consumer complaining behavior have been
proposed by Landon and by Gronhaug [4, 9]. Landon' s
model is as follows: Complaint Behavi or = f (Dissatis-
faction, Import ance, Benefit from complaining, Person-
ality)
clustered around complex products, high in initial out-
lays, and probably high in perceived risk. Both models,
Landon and Gronhaug, can be used as a starting point in
developing a model of organizational buyer complaining
behavior.
The model proposed in this article addresses the var-
iables that are most salient in influencing complaining
behavior of buyers. A model of organizational buyer
complaining behavior will make similar contributions as
those described by Landon [9] for a model of consumer
complaint behavior. From Landon' s perspective a model
of complaint behavior will do the following:
1. Organize and synthesize existing knowl edge in the
area.
2. Suggest conceptual links bet ween various compo-
nents of complaining behavior.
3. Al l ow hypotheses to be formulated as to the in-
teraction bet ween many variables.
4. Pinpoint areas of weakness in our understanding.
In view of the lack of prior substantive research, prob-
ably the greatest contribution of a model of organiza-
tional buyer complaining behavior will be the generation
of hypotheses about the interaction bet ween certain var-
iables. The model proposed in this article, as shown in
Fig. 1, consists of five categories of predictor variables.
The categories are: (1) individual/behavioral variables,
(2) situational variables, (3) organization/structural var-
A
i i
model of industrial buyer
complaining behavior
The variables presented in the model are relevant in
explaining some aspects of compl ai ni ng by organiza-
tional buyers, but it does not include any of the organiza-
tion variables that may impact on complaining.
Gronhaug' s model assumes that dissatisfaction/satisfac-
tion is related to various stages in the buyi ng process.
The basic part of the model shows four classes of
exogenous variables (product, individual, social, and
structure-related variables) exerting influence on the buy-
ing process, satisfaction/dissatisfaction, complaining be-
havior, and the out come of the complaint. In testing this
model, Gronhaug found that the nature of the product has
an impact on perceived dissatisfaction and on propensity
to complain. He also found that complaints seem to be
iables, (4) type of purchase, and (5) dissatisfaction. The
variables chosen are parallel with those found in the
Sheth [12] and Webster and Wind [16] models of indus-
trial buyer behavior.
A description of each cat egory of variables follows.
The individual/behavioral component describes variables
that are relevant in explaining the behavior of individu-
als. Emphasis is placed on this component in order to
determine whet her or not variables such as personality,
tolerance for risk, decision-making style, or others affect
complaining behavior. Buyer s' behavior as an individual
must be understood in order to understand their actions in
301
I
Dissatisfaction
i . 1 . . . . . . .
Individual Aspects
of Behavior
1. Experience of the
Buyer
2. Personality
Characteristics
3. D e c i s i o n - m a k i n g
Style
4, Perceived Risk
5. Source Loyalty
P r o b l e m Perception
I
P r o b l e m
S i t u a t i o n
1. C r i t i c a l n e s s o f
t h e p r o b l e m
F r e q u e n c y o f
problems of a
similar nature
Type of industrial
product
4. Relationship w i t h
the supplier:
( a ) New
(b) Existing
I
Structural
Variables
i. Size o f
Organization
2. Interdepartmental
conflict
3. Organizational
orientation
4. Organization of
the buying center
5. Number of suppliers
1
Type of
Purchase
I. N e w task
2. Modified rebuy
3. Straight rebuy
t
FI GURE 1.
behavior.
! . . . . . I !
I
Organizational Buyer Complaint Behavior ' ~
Model of organizational buyer complaint
their role as a buyer for the organization. A thorough
analysis of this component may reveal some relationships
bet ween individual characteristics and complaining be-
havior. One exampl e is woul d be the effect varyi ng levels
of experience woul d have on the buyer ' s compl ai ni ng
behavior. One woul d expect a higher incidence of com-
plaining from an i nexperi enced buyer due to lack of
familiarity with buyi ng situations, sources of suppl y, etc.
One woul d also expect greater percei ved risk to be ex-
peri enced by a buyer with less experience.
The situational elements are those that are unique or
peculiar to a certain set of circumstances. Some exampl es
of situational variables are t ype of probl em, the critical-
ness of the probl em, t ype of product purchased, etc.
Intuitively one woul d expect more complaints about dis-
satisfaction with a product or service that is percei ved as
bei ng critical to the proper functioning of the organiza-
tion, as opposed to a product or service that is not
percei ved as bei ng that important. This should definitely
be the case when substitutes cannot be used to replace the
original item in the production process. The number of
sources of supply is also likely to i mpact on compl ai nt
behavior.
The organization/structural variables represent the var-
iables in the organizational syst em that may affect com-
plaining about products or services. Some significant
302
variables in this cat egory woul d be the size of the organi-
zation, interdepartmental conflict and met hods or pro-
cesses of resolution, organization orientation or climate,
and the organization of the buyi ng center and the purchas-
ing department. Whether or not an organization is cen-
tralized or decentralized may affect the amount of author-
ity of the buyer and thus influence complaining behavior.
The next component of the model is the t ype of pur-
chase. The new task, modi fi ed rebuy, and straight rebuy
situations involve varying degrees of effort and attention
[ 11 ]. The new task is considered the most compl ex of the
three buyi ng decisions. It is surrounded by much more
uncertainty than the other t wo. The straight rebuy is
basically a routine decision and is the least compl ex of
the three. The modi fi ed rebuy is in bet ween the other
t wo, and possessi ng qualities of both. There should be
more percei ved risk involved in a new task situation than
in the others. More probl ems are likely to be encount ered
in a new task, and thus more complaints.
The final component of the model is that of dissatisfac-
tion. Dissatisfaction occurs when there is a gap or dis-
tance bet ween the buyer ' s ideal attribute combi nat i on of
a product or service and the attribute combi nat i on of the
product or service offered by vendors or suppliers [5].
The magnitude of the discrepancy bet ween expectations
and actual performance may gi ve some indication of the
i i i l l ! i
likelihood of complaining. However, studies have shown
that consumers who are dissatisfied do not necessarily
complain [ 1].
SOME THEORETICAL POSTULATES
The model of industrial buyer complaining behavior
presented here is based on relationships and variables
used in models of organizational buyer behavior. Many
of these same variables will impact upon complaint be-
havior. To test certain specific relationships in the model,
the following working hypotheses can be postulated.
1. The frequency of complaints by organizational
buyers will be greater for a new vendor or supplier than
one with which the buyer has dealt previously.
2. Expectations for a particular purchase will be higher
for organizational buyers when the supplier is new.
3, The number of complaints will be greater in a new
task situation than in a straight rebuy situation.
4. Buyer s' complaints about product performance is
directly related to the importance of the product to the
organization.
5. The number of problems experi enced by buyers are
greater when there is a single supplier than when there
are multiple sources of supply.
6. The greater the amount of actual or perceived dis-
satisfaction, the greater the likelihood of overt complain-
ing.
CONCLUSIONS
Although models of consumer behavior incorporate
consumer satisfaction, organizational buyer satisfaction
does not fit so easily into a conceptual framework. The
inability to determine industrial buyer behavior from ul-
timate consumer behavior is a result of differences that
exist bet ween the two groups. Some of these have been
elaborated on by Webster and Wind [16] as follows:
1. Organizational buying decisions are more complex
because more people are involved with them and dif-
ferent people will probably assume different roles. The
roles of users, deciders, influencers, and buyers must be
identified and dealt with.
2. Organizational buyi ng decisions often involve
maj or technical complexities relating to the product or
service being purchased.
3. Organizational buyi ng decisions typically take
longer to make because of the technical complexity.
Decisions usually require more information, undergo
longer evaluations, and involve more uncertainty.
Although these basic differences limit the direct
applicability of consumer behavior models to the area of
organizational buyer behavior, there are some parallels
bet ween the two. Where parallels do exist, efforts should
be undertaken to strengthen one area based on the con-
ceptual corroboration that exists in the other.
To account for the differences existing bet ween con-
sumer behavior and organizational buyer behavior with
respect to the issue of complaining, improved concep-
tualization must incorporate the peculiarities of organiza-
tional buying. One such model of industrial buyer be-
havior, Sheth [12], includes satisfaction, but from a lim-
ited perspective. The model shows satisfaction with past
purchases as a process contributing to differential expec-
tations among individuals involved in the purchasing
process. It may be inferred from this that higher levels of
satisfaction with past purchases are likely to lead to
repeat patronage with the same supplier over a period of
time. This article is an attempt to contribute to the im-
proved conceptualization and understanding of satisfac-
tion, dissatisfaction, and complaint behavior in the or-
ganizational buyer area. Improved conceptualization will
ultimately lead to improved marketing practice and effec-
tiveness.
REFERENCES
1. Best, Arthur and Andreasen, Alan R., Talking Back to Business: Voiced
and Unvoiced Consumer Complaints, Working Paper, Center for the
Study of Responsive Law, Washington, DC, 1976.
2. Day, Ralph L., Ed., Consumer Satisfaction, Dissatisfaction and Com-
plaining Behavior. Marketing Research Symposium, Indiana University,
April 20-22, 1977.
3. Day, Ralph and Landon, E. Laird, Jr., Toward A Theory of Consumer
Complaining Behavior in ConsumerandlndustrialBuyingBehavior. Arch
Woodside et al., Eds. Elsevier, New York, 1977.
4. Gronhaug, Kjell, Exploring Consumer Complaining Behavior: A Model
and Some Empirical Results, in Advances in Consumer Research, William
D. Perrault, Ed. Association for Consumer Research, Atlanta, 1977,
Vol. IV.
5. Handy, Charles R., Monitoring Consumer Satisfaction with Food Prod-
ucts, in Conceptualization and Measurement of Consumer Satisfaction
and Dissatisfaction, H. Keith Hunt, Ed. Marketing Science Institute,
Cambridge, MA, April 1 I - 13, 1976.
6. How Industry Buys~1970. Scientific American, Inc., New York, 1969).
7. Hunt, H. Keith, Ed., Conceptualization and Measurement of Consumer
Satisfaction and Dissatisfaction, Marketing Science Institute, Cambridge,
MA, April 11-13, 1976.
8. Kotler, Philip, Marketing Management: Analysis, Planning and Control,
Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1976, 3rd ed.
9. Landon, E. Larid, Jr., A Model of Consumer Complaint Behavior, in
Consumer Satisfaction, Dissatisfaction, and Complaining Behavior,
Ralph L. Day, ed. Marketing Research Symposium, Indiana University,
April 20-22, 1977.
3 0 3
10. Robinson, Larry M., Consumer Complaint Behavior of New Car Owners:
Development and Test of a Theoretical Model, Ph.D. dissertation, The
Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, 1977 (unpublished).
11. Robinson, Patrick J., Faris, C. W., and Wind, Yoram, Industrial Buying
and Creative Marketing. Allyn and Bacon, Boston, 1967.
12. Sheth, Jagdish N., " A Model of Industrial Buying Behavi or", Journal of
Marketing 37, 50-56 (October 1973).
13. Sheth, Jagdish N., Recent Developements in Organizational Buying Be-
havior, in Ref. 3.
14. Wall, Marjorie, Dickey, Lois, and Talarzyk, W. Wayne, Predicting and
Profiling Consumer Satisfaction and Propensity to Complain, in Con-
sumer Satisfaction, Dissatisfaction and Complaining Behavior, Ralph L.
Day, Ed. Marketing Research Symposium, Indiana University, April
20-22, 1977.
15. Webster, Frederick, and Wind, Yoram, A General Model for Understand-
ing Organizational Buying Behavior, Journal of Marketing 36 12-19
(April 1972).
16. Webster, Frederick, and Wind, Yoram, Organizational Buying Behavior
Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N J, 1972.
17. Williams, Robert and Gray, Victor, Dissatisfaction and Complaint Be-
havior of the Industrial Buyer, in 1978 Proceedings of the Southern
Marketing Association, Robert Franz et al, Ed.
304