NOTE: Free essay sample provided on this page should be used for references or sample purposes only. The sample essay is available to anyone, so any direct quoting without mentioning the source will be considered plagiarism by schools, colleges and universities that use plagiarism detection software. To get a completely brand-new, plagiarism-free essay, please use our essay writing service.
One click instant price quote
... ned service quality. Carman, in his article 'Assesment of SERVQUAL 's tates that; " replication of the PZB analysis found most of the dimensions they recommend. 'This was the case even in professional service settings. Validity checks suggest, however, that these dimensions are not so generic that users of these scales should not add items on new factors they believe are important in the quality edition. Further, we recommend that items on courtesy and Access be retained and that the items on some dimensions, such as Responsiveness or Access be expanded where it is believed that these dimensions are of particular importance. " (ibid) In another research study using the SERVQUAL dimensions Taylor (1995) examined how evaluation take place along certain quality dimensions such as tangibility, reliability and responsiveness, given that delays occur in the service delivery process. The result of this study shows that evaluations, along the stated dimensions are highest when perceived service provider control over delay is low and the waiting time is filled.
In another theoretical paper on the perception, evaluation and behavior in a service situation, Better (1992) argues that three types of enviromental dimensions namely ambient conditions (e. g temperature, air quality, noise, music, odor... etc. ), space and function (lay out, equipment, furnishing, etc. ), and signs, symbols and artifacts impact upon both customer and employees. The resulting social interaction between these two parties will also have effects on the overall evaluation of service quality by the customer. (ibid). Whatever it says, , in researcher's point of view, all these situation conditions can be dominated by employees so customer perception can be affected in that direction. In their article, Reassesment of Expectations as a Comparison Standard in Measuring Service Quality: Implications for further Research, Parasuraman, Zeithaml and Berry (1994) responds to concerns raised by Cronin and Taylor about SERVQUAL instrument.
They give explanations by reexamining the underlying arguments and evidence, introducing additional perspectives that they argue are necessary for a balanced assesment of their specification nd measurement of service quality, and isolating the concerns that seem appropriate from those that are questionable. (PZB, 1994) Although SERVQUAL is a phone study generating a lot of support through replication by other studies, it is far from being complete. The reasons for this may be listed as follows: '' 1. SERVQUAL does not explain the formation of expectations or perceptions, or if there are possible links between these two steps of consumer design process. 2. SERVQUAL does not take into account the enviromental factors or the situational influences on the individual at the time of the service delivery.
Another factor that is not accounted for in the model is the effect of prior experience on the perception and the evaluation process. 3. SERVQUAL does not explain if an unusually high or low performance on one of the dimensions will influence the perception and the evaluation of the other dimensions. 4. No effort has been made in the model to establish links between the evaluations of the service quality dimensions and the specific service characteristics such as the degree of tangibility, degree of complexity, degree of customer-employee participation in the service delivery, or the length of commitment the nature of the service requires. 5. SERVQUAL has not been tested for all types of service situations.
Moreover, the model has not been tested in the international context. Thus, the universality of the model has not been confirmed. In other types of enviroment's or for other types of services, the suggested dimensions may be irrelevant, or new dimensions may emerge. Cronin (1992) and Taylor (1994) object to the service Quality = Perceptions-Expectations gap model. They propose a model instead, a scale that measures service quality, called SERVPERF, based on the consumers' perceptions of the service performance. The SERVPERF scale results in a summoned overall service quality score that can be plotted relative to time and specific consumer subgroups (eg; demographic segments. ) (L.
Schiffman, L. Kanuk- 1997) Its based on the same dimensions like SERVQUAL, where service quality is expressed as a function of perception only, rather than by the gap. (P-E). As a proof to superiority of SERVPERF they offer the results of their study, where SERVPERF model over SERVQUAL. They explain that SERVPERF is a better indicator of consumer satisfaction compared to SERVQUAL.
They argue further that "consumer satisfaction exerts a stronger influence on purchase intentions than does not service quality''. They maintain that while service quality is an antecedent of customer satisfaction, satisfaction itself requires the existance of other factors as well. These other factors are availability, price, convenience, etc. Consumers do not necessarily buy service that deliver the highest quality, but they buy services that give the highest level of satisfaction. Because of this fact, the attitude based measure of service quality is not sufficient. It should further be improved to a better predictor of purchase intentions.
PZB respond (1994) these claims with their article, titled Reassesment of Expectations as a Comparison Standard. They find Cronin and Taylor's observations meaningfulness, and their result which supports the idea that 'service quality leading customer satisfaction and high level of customer satisfaction need' quite debatable. ''An important question to ask is assessing the practical value of SERVQUAL vis -- vis SERVPERF is, Are managers who use service quality measurements more interested in accurately identifying service shortfalls or explaining variance in an overall measure of perceived service? (Explained variance is the only criterion on which SERVPERF performs better than SERVQUAL, and as discussed previously, this could be due to shared method variance. ) We believe that managers would be more interested in an accurate diagnosis of service quality problems. From a practical standpoint, SERVQUAL is preferable than SERVPERF in our judgement. That superior diagnostic value of SERVQUAL more than offsets the loss in predictive power. ' (PZB, 1994) There are other theories and models on service quality, with a try on establishing link between purchase intension. (Building-Kara-Starting-Zeithaml's dynamic model) These are to be proven in order for service quality work can be tied to consumer satisfaction and purchase intention. Until these ties between service quality and behavioral outcomes are established, the SERVQUAL and SERVPERF are only explanatory models, without any predictive ability. However, it should be realized that these are the first steps in the way of defining and building service quality, thus consumer satisfaction and the intended behavioral outcomes.
Its the 'basic skeleton' for the use 'across a broad spectrum of services'. (Carman, 1990) Clearly the wording and subject of some individual items need to be customized to each service setting. The stability of SERVQUAL dimensions is impressive, but the evidence reported here suggests that the PZB dimensions are not completely generic. (ibid). Bibliography:
Free research essays on topics related to: customer satisfaction, service quality, service delivery, satisfaction, dimensions
Research essay sample on Service Quality Customer Satisfaction
