Certifying third-party repair services can help companies retain customers by signalling that broken products still have value and “unused utility”, according to research led by Penn State. The researchers were inspired by the “fix it” mindset of their parents and grandparents and concerned by the growth of disposable consumption, in which consumers increasingly replace broken goods rather than repair them. They investigated whether repair services could encourage consumers to extend the life of durable products without reducing brand sales or requiring companies to operate costly in-house repair programmes.

The study found that brand-certified third-party repair services benefited companies, repair providers and consumers. Certification signalled that broken products still had useful life remaining, increased repair rates and reduced the likelihood that customers would switch brands. The findings, published in the Journal of Consumer Research, suggest that companies can gain many of the benefits of an in-house repair service by approving independent providers. Study co-author Karen Winterich, distinguished professor of marketing at Penn State’s Smeal College of Business, said certification can also help brands appear more sustainable and keep customers satisfied with their purchases.

Across six experiments, the researchers examined how certification influenced repair decisions. In one study involving 2,056 American consumers, participants saw identical social media advertisements for laptop repair services and were directed to landing pages featuring a major laptop brand’s logo. Only one page stated that technicians were brand-certified. Consumers were nearly twice as likely to initiate a repair with the certified service. A similar experiment involving another repair provider and laptop brand found that certification increased repair leads by more than 700%.

Another experiment asked 501 US participants to imagine that headphones from a fictional brand had broken after two years. Participants viewed advertisements for either a non-certified third-party repair service, a brand-certified repair service or repairs offered directly by the manufacturer. Those shown certified or brand-operated repair services were more likely to repair their headphones, with no significant difference between the two options. Among participants who preferred replacement, 76% said they would switch to another brand, highlighting the potential risk to companies that fail to support repairs.

Further experiments showed that certification was particularly influential for consumers with limited product expertise. These consumers relied on brand approval as a signal that a broken product retained value and was worth repairing. Certification also had a greater effect on products with low sentimental value. By contrast, consumers were more likely to repair emotionally significant possessions, such as wedding gifts, regardless of who provided the repair service. A final experiment involving nearly 400 video game console owners found that certification was less effective when an upgraded product was about to be released, as consumers were more likely to buy the new version.

Overall, the researchers described certified third-party repairs as a “win-win-win” for brands, consumers and independent repair providers. Companies can retain customers and support sustainability without bearing the full cost of an internal repair operation. In contrast, repair businesses gain customers and consumers are encouraged to keep useful products for longer. “Consumers don’t want to be wasteful, but replacing is massively wasteful in many cases,” Winterich said. The findings suggest that brand certification can reassure consumers that broken products still have value and are worth fixing.

More information: Nathan Allred et al, Repair Service Signals: How Brand Repair Services Signal Unused Utility and Increase Product Repair, Journal of Consumer Research. DOI: 10.1093/jcr/ucag009

Journal information: Journal of Consumer Research Provided by Penn State