It was last week when my second phone developed a snag and stopped working. Although it was my backup phone, I still wanted it to work properly just in case I needed it in case of an emergency. I went to the Nokia Priority Dealership in Bistupur with the hope they might have an in-house phone repair service. But to my disappointment, they didn't. The shop owner, in turn, gave me the address and contact details of the actual repair centre which was located in Sakchi. I went to the shop immediately from there. After reaching there, I could visibly see a stark difference between this store and Priority Dealership which I had just come from. While the Priority Dealership had the standardized look and feel of a typical Nokia Dealership, this repair centre looked like a run-down place. Although the Nokia logo was prominently visible, I was still feeling a little unsure because the physical environment within the shop left a lot to be desired. Nonetheless, I went into the shop. The shop had three adjacent rooms - one with a computer whereas the other two were the workshops. There was seating for five people but a couple of the chairs were broken. I went upto the person sitting with the computer and explained to him what the problem was with my phone. After listening to my complaint, he told me that his team would check the for problems that they were capable of handling. In case it was something beyond that, then the phone would have to be sent to Kolkata. He also added that it might take anything between 3 days to 2 weeks to get my phone back. Since I was already there and had no other option, I gave him my phone. The attendant asked me for my details and specific information about the phone (purchase). After entering all the data into the system, he said that he would call me in 3 days and let me know what the problem is. So I came back to XL.
Two days later, I got a call from the same person. He said that his team was unable to rectify the problem and that the phone would have to be sent to Kolkata. He quoted a total cost of Rs.800 for getting the phone repaired. The cost seemed a little steep to me but given that I had no other option, I asked him to send the phone to the Head Office in Kolkata. After about 10 days, I received a call from the repair centre saying that my phone was ready. I went there quickly, paid the money and came back. Three days into using the phone, the same problem again started to crop up. I didn't know what to think. Did I make a mistake? Should I have gone with my gut instincts and not gone there when I saw how shabby the place was? Was I a victim of a blatant act of cheating? As all these thoughts raced through my mind, I decided that I would not go back to the repair shop even to claim for a refund. I decided that I would only get my phone fixed in Delhi, which had shops which I could trust.
EXPECTATIONS PRIOR TO SERVICE ENCOUNTER
The Nokia brand is associated with trust and reliability. These associations are strongly ingrained in the minds of consumers such as me. As a result, there was a certain implicit level of trust in the repair centre I was going to. Though the shop never claimed to be an exclusive Nokia Repair Centre (although the Nokia Logos and billboards might suggest otherwise), I assumed this from that the shop was referred by a Nokia Priority Dealer. I was therefore expecting a hassle-free, reliable and trustworthy service experience from the repair centre
SERVICE CLASSIFICATION
1) This was clearly a tangible service where I could evaluate the quality of the service from how quickly they were able to rectify the problem and make sure that the phone was working properly
2) This is a case of possession processing. This is because this service encounter could have been recreated even if I wasn't present there personally. In other words, this service encounter could have been completed even if Sanmoy had gone to drop my phone instead of me.
OUTCOME: Phone was returned in working condition after 10 days. The phone ceased to work after three days of operation
INTERACTION: The interaction with the attendant was extremely pleasant. His replies were prompt and he called me on time to apprise me of the status of the phone repair
PHYSICAL EVIDENCE QUALITY: The repair centre had extremely low physical evidence quality. The interiors were shabby. The lighting was dim. The seating meant for customers was broken to say the least.
SERVICE RATING
a) Reliability: 1 (The phone stopped working three days after getting it back)
b) Assurance: 2 (The repair centre made no effort to assure me of a quality service. Their insistence on sending the phone to Kolkata only created more doubts)
c) Tangibles: 1 (The repair centre was in dilapitated condition. Seating was insufficient, the lighting was dim and the interiors were dank)
d) Empathy: 3 (The attendant was moderately empathic towards me)
e) Responsiveness: 3 (The repair shop was able to 'fix' my phone 5 days before the suggested) date
