Crisis governance, legitimacy, and consumer ethics in service systems
Nikolaos Iason Koufodontis, Prachi GalaPurpose
This paper aims to examine how crisis-related service restrictions shape ethical consumer responses, challenging the assumption that restrictive governance inherently promotes responsibility. It develops a dual-process model explaining how legitimacy and autonomy perceptions condition ethical engagement and resistance in service systems under crisis.
Design/methodology/approach
Building on a combined semi-systematic and integrative literature review, the study uses a mixed-method design integrating online discourse analysis and survey data from international consumers, using tourism as an illustrative service context.
Findings
Restrictive service measures fragment ethical legitimacy rather than uniformly enhancing responsibility, producing stances ranging from legitimacy-based compliance to autonomy-driven resistance. Ethical responses are shaped more by identity-coded moral orientations and legitimacy perceptions than by demographics.
Research limitations/implications
The paper advances services marketing and service governance research by conceptualizing crisis governance as a customer-facing relational process. Future research should extend the model to other service sectors and organizational contexts.
Practical implications
Crisis governance is more effective when supported by marketing-oriented service communication that enhances legitimacy and autonomy rather than relying on enforcement alone.
Social implications
Overly coercive crisis governance risks undermining intrinsic responsibility and weakening collective ethical commitment in service systems.
Originality/value
The paper provides an empirically grounded model linking legitimacy, autonomy and ethical stance formation in crisis-governed service systems, bridging consumer ethics and services marketing.