The process of service delivery and the end of the process should be assessed, in evaluating any service quality (Parasuraman, et al. 1985). However, the three characteristics of service quality itself i.e. intangibility, heterogeneity, and inseparability make it difficult to measure service quality. (Parasuraman et al, 1985). Therefore, Parasuramanet al. (1985, 1988) suggested that the most suitable method of determining service quality was to measure customers’ perceptions. Perceived quality was defined by (Parasuraman et al., 1988, p.17) as “the degree and direction of discrepancy between consumers’ perceptions and expectations” that perceptions and expectations play an important role in measuring overall quality (Carman, 1990).
Ekinci (2002) suggested that in defining what service quality is, there are two ideologies. The first is the North American ideology mostly dominated by research conducted by Parasuraman et al. (1985), whereas, Gronroos (1984) is one of the pioneers of the second, the Nordic European ideology (Ekinci, 2002). According to Gronroos (1988), the two dimensions of perceived service quality are technical and functional. The technical dimension is defined as “quality of the service delivered.” The functional dimension is described as how customers are influenced by “how they receive the service and how they experience the simultaneous production and consumption process” Gronroos (1988) advocated that the technical dimension can be measured objectively, whereas, the functional dimension is usually evaluated subjectively and that the operational image also has a large effect on the way customers perceive service quality. Furthermore, Gronroose (1988) highlighted that the technical and functional qualities of a service have a direct effect on an operation’s image. Gronroos (1988) put forward six criteria of perceived quality; these include, professionalism and skills; attitudes and behaviour; accessibility and flexibility; reliability and trustworthiness; recovery, and reputation and credibility.
Lehtinen and Lehtinen (1991) described a similar approach to measuring service quality. These researchers have both a three and a two dimensional approach. The three dimensional approach comprises of three components of service quality including physical, interactive, and corporate. The two-dimensional approach has two elements of service quality namely process and outcome Both approaches developed by Lehtinen & Lehtinen (1991) are similar to the technical, functional, and image service qualities suggested by Gronroos (1988).
Parasuraman et al. (1985) established an idea to measure service quality through ‘gap model’ in which they identified five gaps in service quality. Figure 2.1 illustrates the gaps in service quality.
The first gap (Gap 1) is the gap between management perception with customer service expectation. Second gap is between the management perception and service quality specifications. Third gap is between management service quality specifications and service delivery. Fourth gap is between service delivery and external communications to customers. This gap appertains to how companies inform the customers about their services.
Fifth gap (Gap 5) is the difference between the customers’ expectation and their perception of the service which then can assist organizations in determining what the customer really wants (Parasuraman et al., 1988). Parasuraman et al. (1988) developed the SERVQUAL instrument which originated from Gap 5. It is an exploratory method to measure SERVice QUALity from the customers’ point of view. SERVQUAL distinguished 10 dimensions of service quality which are reliability, responsiveness, competence, access, courtesy, communication, credibility, security, understanding, that are potential components of the gap or shortfall between expectations and perceptions.
In 1988, SERVQUAL was modified to evaluate five dimensions of service quality as follows:
1. Tangibles: physical facilities, equipment, and appearance of personnel
2. Reliability: ability to perform the promised service dependably and accurately
3. Responsiveness: willingness to help customers and provide prompt service
4. Assurance: knowledge and courtesy of employees and their ability to inspire trust
and confidence
5. Empathy: Caring, individualized attention the firm provides its customers
(adapted from Parasuraman et al., 1988).
SERVQUAL provides a framework for the business industry to examine the effectiveness of service quality on marketing. Despite being the only technique to measure service quality, SERVQUAL has received criticisms by many researchers (Bolton & Drew, 1991, Carman, 1990, Cronin & Taylor, 1992, Teas 1993: 1994). Carman (1990) questioned the relevance of the gap, between expectation and perceptions. Later work by Cronin and Taylor (1992) criticised the measurement of perception (P) minus expectations (E). They argued that the expectations vary across time and could not be evaluated at the same time.
Teas (1993) further argued that the value of ‘E’ was based on respondents’ interpretations from the questions and not their attitudes. Teas (1993) recommended two alternative models to SERVQUAL called Evaluated Performance (EP) and a Normed Quality (NQ) Model.
This is Preview only. If you need the solution of this assignment, please send us email with the complete assignment title: ProfessorKamranA@gmail.com
