Relationships between servicequality and behavioral

outcomesA study of private bank customers in

GermanyUgur Yavas

East Tennesse State University, Johnson City, Tennessee, USAMartin Benkenstein

Professor of Marketing, University of Rostock, Rostock, Germany, andUwe Stuhldreier

Market Strategies and Target Group Management, Dresdner Bank AG,Frankfurt, Germany

Keywords Service quality assurance, Surveys, Germany, Correlation analysis, Behaviour

Abstract This study examines the nature of relationships between service quality, backgroundcharacteristics, and satisfaction and selected behavioral outcomes by using retail banking inGermany as its setting. Study results show that service quality is at the root of customersatisfaction and is linked to such behavioral outcomes as word of mouth, complaint,recommending and switching. However, different aspects of service quality and differentconsumer characteristics seem to be associated with different outcomes. For instance, the resultssuggest that tangible elements of service quality and being a female are more closely associatedwith positive word of mouth and commitment. On the other hand, “timeliness” aspects of servicedelivery are more closely related to customer satisfaction, and complaint and switching behaviors.Implications of these results to induce greater customer satisfaction, to attain higher levels offavorable outcomes and/or to alleviate negative outcomes are discussed.

IntroductionDuring the past two decades or so, regulatory, structural and technologicalfactors have significantly changed the banking environment throughout theworld (Angur et al., 1999). In a milieu which becomes increasingly competitive,service quality as a critical measure of organizational performance continues tocompel the attention of banking institutions and remains at the forefront ofservices marketing literature and practice (Lassar et al., 2000; Yavas and Yasin,2001). The interest is largely driven by the realization that high service qualityresults in customer satisfaction and loyalty, greater willingness to recommend

The Emerald Research Register for this journal is available at The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

www.em eraldinsight.com/res earchregister www.em eraldinsight .com/0265-2323. htm

This research was supported by a Research Development Committee grant awarded to Dr Yavasby East Tennessee State University.

IJBM22,2

144

Received October 2001Revised July 2003Accepted October 2003

The International Journal of BankMarketingVol. 22 No. 2, 2004pp. 144-157q Emerald Group Publishing Limited0265-2323DOI 10.1108/02652320410521737

to someone else, reduction in complaints and improved customer retentionrates (see, for example, Bitner, 1990; Danaher, 1997; Headley and Miller, 1993;Levesque and McDougall, 1996; Magi and Julander, 1996; Zeithaml et al., 1996).

Undoubtedly owing to the belief that delivery of high service quality is amust for attaining customer satisfaction and a number of other desirablebehavioral outcomes, recent years have witnessed a flurry of researchexploring interrelationships between service quality and, satisfaction andbehavioral outcomes. This study expands the research stream into Germany.The specific objectives of the study are:

. to determine the nature of relationships between service quality, andsatisfaction and selected behavioral outcomes;

. to ascertain which aspects of service quality have significant impact onwhich outcomes and satisfaction; and

. to uncover whether these relationships exhibit similar patterns betweencustomers with different characteristics.

A study addressing these issues is relevant and significant for at least tworeasons. First, while much is known about the relationships between servicequality, satisfaction and behavioral outcomes as a result of research initiallyconducted in the USA and England and later in such other countries as India(Angur et al., 1999), United Arab Emirates (Jamal and Nasser, 2002), Greece(Athanassopoulos et al., 2001) and Turkey (Yavas et al., 1997), there is a paucityof research dealing with these issues in the context of Germany. Hence, thisstudy partially fills in the void and adds to the compendium of knowledge inthe area. Second, in today’s fiercely competitive German banking environment,where German bankers consider delivery of excellent service quality tocustomers a key to success and survival, the findings from the study canprovide them with valuable insights in ways of enhancing service quality toinduce greater customer satisfaction and positive behavioral outcomes. In thenext section, we briefly describe the German banking scene and summarize therelevant literature.

BackgroundGerman banking sceneChallenges coming from several fronts (e.g. structural, regulatory andcustomer-related) make the banking landscape in Germany more competitivethan ever before (Betsch, 1995). Structurally, the German banking system is auniversal banking system in that the banks offer a wide range of servicesranging from retail banking to corporate banking to asset management(Olsson, 1996). The backbone of this universal banking system is the privatebanks (owned by private investors); savings banks (owned by communitiesand districts of federal states) and cooperative banks (owned by members).Although the private commercial banks, the savings banks and the credit

Private bankcustomers in

Germany

145

cooperatives all have different busines priorities, there is no division ofactivities among them as such. Neither are there any significant differencesregarding their operations in the market place. However, unlike the privatebanks, the savings banks and the cooperative banks do not seek to maximizeprofits – at least not formally – but to achieve a reasonable surplus andprovide support to their members. In retail banking, these banks collectivelyaccount for 90 percent of the market: private banks (15 percent); savings banks(51 percent) and cooperative banks (24 percent) (Bundesverband DeutscherBanken, 2000).

Stiff competition to these banks comes not only from one another but alsofrom special niche/direct banks which carry out their transaction withcustomers via telephone and/or online and offer high interest rates and lowservice fees to customers. Fueling competitive pressures on the universal banksare the regulatority changes. For instance, foreign banks can now enter theGerman market easily and compete aggressively with domestic banks. Alsodue to regulatory changes, such non-banking institutions as insurance and carcompanies are allowed to provide retail bank services that were hitherto withinthe domain of traditional universal banks. At a time when banks faceever-intensifying inter and intra competition, they too have to cope with thedemands of discerning, well-informed, value-conscious customers (Szallies,1998) expecting excellent service delivery from their banks.

Until recently, universal banks tried to maintain their competitive standingvia aggressive promotion and extensive branch networks. Bank managers weinterviewed during the course of the study are keenly aware that in today’scompetitive milleu the traditional modus-operandi of focusing on extensivepromotion and branch networking will not be sufficient. They now recognizethe consumer revolution in retail banking (Salmony and Denck, 1999) andfirmly believe that the success in the future will rest on delivering excellentservice to customers.

Relevant literatureService quality. Discussion of the indispensable role of service quality in retailbanking and its measurement has been the focus of a number of studies. Acanvassing of these writings shows that most of them measure service qualityby replicating or adapting Parasuraman et al.’s (1988) five-dimensionSERVQUAL model (see, for example, Angur et al., 1999; Athanassopoulos,1997; Blanchard and Galloway, 1994; Lloyd-Walker and Cheung, 1998;Marshall and Smith, 1999; McDougall and Levesque, 1994; Newman andCowling, 1996; Yavas et al., 1997). A smaller body of writings, however,presents new models or approaches to the measurement of service quality inbanking. For instance, Mersha and Adlaka (1992) applied the Delphi techniqueto a sample of MBA students to generate attributes of poor and good servicequality. They then converted the 12 attributes thus identified into scales and

IJBM22,2

146

analyzed students’ service quality perceptions. The authors concluded that thelist of attributes they generated were similar to the five dimensions ofSERVQUAL.

In another study, Avkiran (1994) developed a multi-dimensional instrumentfor measuring customer-perceived quality in retail branch banking. UsingSERVQUAL as a starting point and then adding items that he extracted from aqualitative study commissioned to establish quality service standards,Avkiran (1994) followed an iterative process and identified staff conduct,credibility, communication and access to teller services as the final dimensionsof service quality. More recently, Aldlaigan and Buttle (2002), based on thetechnical and functional service quality schema proposed by Gronroos (1984),developed a new scale to measure service quality perceptions of retail bankcustomers. Their multi-stage, multi-phase and multi-sample study resulted inSYSTRA-SQ, which is comprised of service system quality, behavioral servicequality, service transactional accuracy, and machine service quality. Aconclusion that surfaces from a synthesis of the writings on measurement ofservice quality is that SERVQUAL “. . . still is the most widely used instrumentfor measuring service quality” (Angur et al., 1999, p. 121).

Satisfaction and behavioral outcomes. Previous research in servicesacknowledges a strong positive correlation between service quality andsatisfaction. However, the directionality of the relationship has been a source ofmuch debate (Bahia et al., 2000). Some early works depicted service qualityperceptions as an outcome of satisfaction (cf Bitner, 1990; Oliver, 1981;Parasuraman et al., 1988). Later works, however, have characterized servicequality as an antecedent of satisfaction (Anderson and Sullivan, 1993; Drewand Bolton, 1991; Oliver, 1993; Parker and Mathews, 2001). There is now aconvergence of opinion that service quality is a primarily cognitive constructwhile satisfaction is a complex concept with a healthy dose of both cognitiveand affective components (Dabholkar, 1995) and that favorable service qualityperceptions lead to improved satisfaction (Cronin et al., 2000).

Research conducted specifically in the context of financial services isconsonant with the extant thinking. For instance, Jamal and Nasser (2002)contend that core and relational dimensions of service quality are causalantecedents of customer satisfaction. In a similar vein Lassar et al. (2000)demonstrate that a technical/functional quality-based model of service qualityis a reliable predictor of satisfaction. Still another study by Yavas et al. (1997)shows that servie quality is an antecedent of satisfaction.

Previous studies in services suggest that service quality demonstratespositive relationships with a number of behavioral intentions either directly orthrough the mediating effect of satisfaction (Cronin et al., 2000). Researchconducted in the domain of financial services lends credence to this observatoinand shows that favorable perceptions of service quality lead to positiveword-of-mouth, lessening of complaint tendencies and continuity in

Private bankcustomers in

Germany

147

bank-customer relationships (e.g. Angur et al., 1999; Athanassopoulos et al.,2001; Caruana, 2002; Yavas et al., 1997).

StudyPrevious research exploring relationships among service quality, satisfactionand behavioral outcomes has typicaly relied on surveymethod (e.g. Angur et al.,1999; Athanassopoulos et al., 2001; Caruana, 2002; Jamal and Nasser, 2002;Yavas et al., 1997). In this study, as well, the survey method was used. In thenext subsection (method), we present the sample and measurement proceduresof our survey. This is followed by the study results. We conclude withdiscussion of the implications of the results and suggestions for futureresearch.

MethodSample. Data for the study were collected through self-administratedquestionnaires from the residents of Rostock, a city about 200,000 peoplelocated near the Baltic Sea. A total of 500 questionnaires were hand distributedto potential respondents satisfying the following condition; the respondent hadto have an account with one of the private banks in the city and view that bankas his/her primary bank. If a respondent did not meet this condition during theinitial screening, then members of the field force sought an alternativerespondent in the same neighborhood. After a two-week period, of the 500questionnaires thus distributed, 226 usable ones were retrieved. Respondentshad their main account in one of the following private banks in Rostock:Deutsche Bank, Dresdner Bank, Commerzbank and Vereins and Westbank.

Over half of the respondents (56 percent) were female. The sample wascomprised of well-educated respondents (57 percent had college degree ormore). About 21 percent of the respondents were between the ages of 18 and 34,16 percent between 25 and 34, 21 percent between 35 and 44, 24 percentbetween 45 and 54 and the rest were older than 54. More than one-half (55percent) of the respondents were married and almost two-thirds (64 percent)held full time jobs. Our sample is younger and better educated compared withthe general adult population in Rostock, but is representative of the accountholders in private banks.

Measurement of independent variables. The independent variables of thestudy were service quality and background characteristics. Service quality wasoperationalized via Parasuraman et al.’s (1988) 22-item SERVQUALinstrument. Its use was based on two considerations. First, despite its critics,SERVQUAL is still the most widely used instrument. Second, its adoption canfacilitate comparibility to other studies. In this study, in line with a procedureadvocated by Brown et al. (1993) and Carman (1990), respondents were asked,on sevenpoint scales ranging from “Much worse than I expected” to “Muchbetter than I expected”, to evaluate the performances of their bank. Brown et al.

IJBM22,2

148

(1993) found this alternative method to have favorable psychometric propertiesand to be more efficient than the disconfirmation procedure used in the originalSERVQUAL which requires respondents to evaluate SERVQUAL items twicefor expectation and performance. The background characteristics consisted ofgender, age, education, marital status and employment status. During theanalysis stage, each one of these variables was reduced to a binary (0/1) form.

Measurement of dependent variables. The dependent variables includedsatisfaction and behavioral outcomes. Satisfaction was operationalized by afive-item measure. These items related to the five dimensions of SERVQUAL.After defining each dimension, respondents were asked to rate their level ofsatisfaction on that dimension on a five-point scale ranging from “verysatisfied” to “very dissatisfied”. For instance, to measure their satisfaction withtheir bank’s tangible elements, respondents were asked to indicate theirsatisfaction concerning the appearance of the bank’s physical facilities,equipment, personnel and communication materials. A respondent’s overallsatisfaction score was derived by linearly combining his/her scores on the fivedimensions. The internal consistency reliability of the overall satisfaction score(coefficient alpha ¼ 0:90) surpassed Nunnally’s (1978) guidelines. Correlationof the overall score with a singleitem satisfaction measure obtained on afivepoint very dissatisfied-very satisfied scale proved to be significant(r ¼ 0:83; p , 0:001) attesting to its convergent validity.

Respondents’ complaint behavior was operationalized by a question relatingto the frequency with which they complained about their bank’s service.Responses were recorded on a fivepoint scale ranging from “always” to“never”. Besides complaint behavior, the study included several other outcomevariables such as commitment, switching and positive word of mouth. Onfivepoint balanced scales ranging from “very likely” to very “unlikely”,respondents were asked to indicate the likelihood with which they wouldengage in each of these behaviors. A listing of the dependent and independentvariables is provided in Table I.

ResultsThe relationships between the independent and the dependent variables wereanalyzed by canonical correlation analysis (Thompson, 1984). The technique isparticularly appealing for this study as its objective is to summarize thecomplex multivariate relationships between two sets of variables (i.e. servicequality items and background characteristics, and satisfaction and behavioraloutcomes) in a smaller number of canonical variates (linear composites orcombinations). The analysis derives successive pairs of linear functions ofindependent and dependent variables sets which are maximally correlatedbetween the variable sets while mutually uncorrelated within the sets (Glorfeldand Fowler, 1988).

Private bankcustomers in

Germany

149

Considering the criteria recommended by Hair et al. (1992) (i.e. statistical

significance of the function, the magnitude of the canonical correlations, and

the redundancy index), in this study, two canonical functions were retained.

Both functions were significant at the 0.05 level of significance. The canonical

correlations between the dependent and independent variates of the first and

the second functions were 0.85 and 0.55, respectively. An inspection of the

Dependent variablesBANSAT Overall satisfaction (12.0)COMBAN Frequency of complaints (3.86)OUT1 To continue to do business at this bank (1.96)OUT2 Say positive things about this bank to other people (2.64)OUT3 Recommend this bank to someone who seeks my advice (2.72)OUT4 Encourage friends and relatives to do business with this bank 2.91)OUT5 Consider this bank as my first choice to buy banking services (2.86)OUT6 Continue to do business with this bank even if it increases its fees (3.22)OUT7 Switch to a competitor that offers more attractive rates (2.43)OUT8 Switch to a competitor if I experience a problem with this bank’s

service (2.25)

Independent variablesSQ1 Having modernlooking/uptodate equipment (4.24)SQ2 Appearance of physical facilities (4.28)SQ3 Appearance of employees (4.26)SQ4 Visual appeal of the materials associated with the service (e.g.

pamphlets) (4.16)SQ5 Keeping promises to do something by a certain time (4.20)SQ6 Interest shown in solving a problem (4.17)SQ7 Performing the service right the first time (4.21)SQ8 Providing the services at the time promised (4.19)SQ9 Accuracy of records (4.42)SQ10 Telling customers exactly when services will be performed (4.16)SQ11 Giving prompt service to customers (4.22)SQ12 Willingness of employees to help customers (4.45)SQ13 Responding to customer requests (4.43)SQ14 Trustworthiness of employees (4.45)SQ15 Safety in transactions (4.42)SQ16 Politeness of employees (4.59)SQ17 The knowledge of the personnel in answering customer questions (4.29)SQ18 Individual attention I receive (4.37)SQ19 Having convenient operating hours (3.60)SQ20 Personal attention given to customers (4.33)SQ21 Having the customer’s best interests at heart (4.08)SQ22 Understanding the specific needs of the customers (4.13)GENDER Male/femaleAGE 35 or older/younger than 35EDUCATION College graduate/less than college graduateMARITAL STATUS Married/not marriedEMPLOYMENT Not employed/employed

Note: Numbers in parentheses are mean valuesTable I.Study variables

IJBM22,2

150

redundancy indices showed that, in the two functions retained, about 44 and 14percent of the variations in the measures comprising the dependent variablesets were explained by the independent variable sets.

By using the canonical loadings, which measure the simple linearcorrelations between an original observed variable in the independent (ordependent) set and the set’s canonical variate, as guides it can be seen that thefirst dependent variate is characterized by satisfaction with bank services andsuch outcome measures as complaint and switching behaviors. On the otherhand, commitment and positive word of mouth are at the root of the dependentvariate of the second function (see Table II). A scrutiny of the loadings suggestthat, in general, service quality items pertaining to responsiveness andreliability tend to have high loadings on the first and tangibility and empathyon the second independent variate. An inspection of the loadings of theindependent variables also reveal that education, employment and age aremore closely associated with the first independent variate. The secondindependent variate, on the other hand, depicted closer association with gender.Marital status did not load significantly on either variate.

Some insights into which of the 22 service quality items and fivebackground variables had the most influence in relation to the dependentvariates can be gained from the standardized canonical coefficients reported inTable III. These coefficients and the weights we calculated based on themsuggest that keeping promises to do something by a certain time, tellingcustomers when services will be performed, delivering the services at thepromised time, interest shown in solving a problem and willingness to helpcustomers have the most impact on the first dependent variate (i.e. satisfaction,complaint and switching composite). The second dependent variatecharacterized by consumer commitment and positive word of mouth is moresusceptible to influence by such aspects of service quality as appearances ofphysical facilities, employees and materials and individual/personal attentiongiven to customers. It is instructive to note that gender differences had somebearing on the second and education on the first dependent variate. Otherwise,the background characteristics lacked the explanatory power of service qualityitems.

DiscussionAt least two important inferences can be made from the study results. First, asdemonstrated in prior research, service quality is at the root of consumers’satisfaction and is linked to such behavioral outcomes as word of mouth,complaint, recommending and switching. Second, however, different aspects ofservice quality and different consumer characteristics seem to be associatedwith different outcomes. For instance, the results here suggest that being afemale is more closely associated with such behavioral outcomes as positiveword of mouth and commitment. This finding makes sense and confirms

Private bankcustomers in

Germany

151

extant theory that women prize interpersonal relationships andcommunications more so than men (Iacobucci and Ostrom, 1993), and aremore likely to offer word of mouth recommendations (Belenky et al., 1986; Higieet al., 1987).

Function1 2

Dependent variablesBANSAT 20.957 20.011OUT1 0.115 20.701OUT2 20.040 0.712OUT3 0.213 20.753OUT4 0.005 20.727OUT5 20.508 20.191OUT6 20.176 20.551OUT7 0.522 0.053OUT8 0.417 20.065COMBAN 0.626 20.481

Independent variablesSQ1 0.702 20.059SQ2 0.142 0.639SQ3 20.251 0.772SQ4 0.344 0.556SQ5 0.685 20.095SQ6 0.715 20.096SQ7 0.586 20.017SQ8 0.531 0.105SQ9 0.582 0.096SQ10 0.560 0.074SQ11 0.574 0.129SQ12 0.804 0.059SQ13 0.767 20.145SQ14 0.753 20.053SQ15 20.114 0.468SQ16 20.032 0.766SQ17 0.804 0.107SQ18 0.769 20.043SQ19 0.555 0.052SQ20 0.118 0.774SQ21 0.200 0.847SQ22 0.838 0.107GENDER 0.054 0.230AGE 20.264 20.070EDUCATION 0.218 20.074MARITAL STATUS 20.022 0.000EMPLOYMENT 20.121 0.001Canonical correlation 0.85 0.55

Table II.Canonical loadings

IJBM22,2

152

Results of the study conjure up several actions that German banks can take toenhance service quality to induce greater customer satisfaction, to attain higherlevels of favorable outcomes and/or to alleviate negative outcomes. Forinstance, the results suggest that improvements in tangible elements of servicequality should lead to higher levels of commitment and positive word of mouth.Therefore, enhancements in such tangible elements as appearance of physical

Function1 2

Dependent variablesBANSAT 20.948 20.662OUT1 0.021 0.331OUT2 0.003 21.205OUT3 20.106 1.458OUT4 20.035 20.013OUT5 0.147 20.256OUT6 0.065 20.465OUT7 0.215 0.131OUT8 0.154 20.090COMBAN 20.099 20.939Independent variablesSQ1 0.147 20.530SQ2 0.149 0.662SQ3 0.187 20.694SQ4 0.048 0.351SQ5 20.245 0.170SQ6 20.329 20.026SQ7 20.019 20.054SQ8 0.244 20.055SQ9 0.007 0.043SQ10 0.023 20.132SQ11 0.274 20.017SQ12 0.387 0.092SQ13 20.496 20.025SQ14 0.008 0.122SQ15 20.053 20.271SQ16 0.054 20.102SQ17 0.122 0.183SQ18 0.145 20.305SQ19 0.069 20.295SQ20 20.259 0.252SQ21 0.224 0.602SQ22 0.297 0.232GENDER 20.026 0.166AGE 0.046 20.321EDUCATION 0.147 20.086MARITAL STATUS 20.034 0.014EMPLOYMENT 20.031 20.027

Table III.Standardized canonical

coefficients

Private bankcustomers in

Germany

153

facilities and employees and improvements in ambient conditions and spatiallayout are likely to pay dividends and lead to positive word of mouth andincreased loyalty. On the other hand, “timeliness” aspects of service deliveryare closely related to customers’ satisfaction and their complaint and switchingbehaviors. Currently, the German banks are investing significant sums on newtechnologies (e.g. video-banking, internet-banking, telephone-banking) toenhance the timeliness of their services and ease the access of customers totheir banks. This is commendable and should pay off. Yet, our experiences withGerman banks in the area show that down-times and other “glitches” in the useof these technologies are also common occurrences and lead to customercomplaints and frustration. Therefore, German banks would be well-advised tominimize technical problems that would interfere with provision of timelyservices to customers.

Additionally, the study findings show that such human/interpersonalaspects of service quality as whether or not employees are interested in solvingcustomers’ problems, whether they give individual/personal attention tocustomers and demonstrate willingness to help customers are closely related tosatisfaction and behavioral outcomes. Bank managers in the area should takeheed of this finding. Because our experiences with frontline bank employees inRostock, which was part of the former East Germany, show that especially theolder ones carry the vestiges/habits of yesteryear. Being brought up in anon-customer oriented environment (communist sellers’ markets) many arebureaucratic and arrogant in their dealings with customers. To remedy this,banks should make every conceivable effort to include interpersonal skillstraining in their overall training programs. In this context, training given toemployees should focus on “learning how to learn” in a new bankingenvironment where customer is the “king”. Such training should be designed tofacilitate the whole change process including unfreezing (creating themotivation to change), changing (developing new attitudes and behaviorsbased on new information and cognitive redefinition), and re-freezing(stabilizing the changes).

Directions for future researchAlthough this study expands our knowledge of the relationships betweenservice quality and satisfaction and behavioral outcomes, viable prospects forfurther research remain. First, this study was conducted among private bankcustomers in one city. This may delimit generalizations. Replications amongcustomers of different types of banks in Rostock as well as among private bankcustomers elsewhere in Germany would be illuminating.

Second, the conceptual model investigated here is based on literaturedeveloped in non-German contexts. While the results reported here lend furthercredence to earlier findings, previous research suggests that culture canmoderate relationships between service quality and behavioral outcomes

IJBM22,2

154

(Yavas et al., 1997). Future international research would allow for greatergeneralization of the relationships tested. However, in such studies, culturemust be explicitly modeled, the moderator hypothesis clearly stated, and theresults compared across cultures.

References

Aldlaigan, A.H. and Buttle, F.A. (2002), “SYSTRA-SQ: a new measure of bank service quality”,International Journal of Service Industry Management, No. 4, pp. 362-81.

Anderson, E.W. and Sullivan, M.W. (1993), “The antecedents and consequences of customersatisfaction for firms”, Marketing Science, Spring, pp. 125-43.

Angur, M.G., Nataraajan, R. and Jahera, J.S. (1999), “Service quality in the banking industry: anassessment in a developing economy”, International Journal of Bank Marketing, No. 3,pp. 116-23.

Athanassopoulos, A., Gounaris, S. and Stathakopoulos, V. (2001), “Behavioral responses tocustomer satisfaction: an empirical study”, European Journal of Marketing, No. 5/6,pp. 687-707.

Athanassopoulos, A.D. (1997), “Service quality and operating efficiency synergies formanagement control in the provision of financial services: evidence from Greek bankbranches”, European Journal of Operations Research, No. 2, pp. 300-13.

Avkiran, N.K. (1994), “Developing an instrument to measure customer service quality in branchbanking”, International Journal of Bank Marketing, No. 6, pp. 10-18.

Bahia, K., Paulin, M. and Perrien, J. (2000), “Reconciliating literature about client satisfaction andperceived services quality”, Journal of Professional Services Marketing, No. 2, pp. 27-41.

Belenky, M.F., McVickar Clinchy, B., Rule Goldberger, N. and Mattuck Tarule, J. (1986),Women’sWays of Knowing: The Development of Self, Voice, and Mind, Bash Books, Inc., New York,NY.

Betsch, O. (1995), “Wettbewerbsveranderungen auf den Finanzdienstleistungsmarkten und derUmbruch der Vertriebssysteme”, in Betsch, O. and Wiechers, R. (Eds), HandbuchFinanzvertrieb, Fritz Knapp, Frankfurt a.M., pp. 3-21.

Bitner, M.J. (1990), “Evaluating service encounters: the effects of physical surroundings andemployee response”, Journal of Marketing, No. 2, pp. 69-82.

Blanchard, R.F. and Galloway, R.L. (1994), “Quality in retail-banking”, International Journal ofService Industry Management, No. 4, pp. 5-23.

Brown, T.J., Churchill, G.A. and Peter, J.P. (1993), “Improving the measurement of servicequality”, Journal of Retailing, Spring, pp. 127-39.

Bundesverband Deutscher Banken (2000), Banken 2000: Fakten, Meinungen, Perspektiven, July,available at: www.bdb.de, BDB, Berlin.

Carman, J.M. (1990), “Consumer perceptions of service quality: an assessment of the SERVQUALdimensions”, Journal of Retailing, No. 1, pp. 33-55.

Caruana, A. (2002), “Service loyalty: the effects of service quality and the mediating role ofcustomer satisfaction”, European Journal of Marketing, No. 7/8, pp. 811-28.

Cronin, J.J., Brady, M.K. and Hult, G.T.M. (2000), “Assessing the effects of quality, value andcustomer satisfaction on consumer behavioral intentions in service environments”, Journalof Retailing, No. 2, pp. 193-218.

Private bankcustomers in

Germany

155

Dabholkar, P.A. (1995), “Contingency framework for predicting causality between customersatisfaction and servie quality”, in Sujan, M. and Kardes, F. (Eds), Advances in ConsumerResearch, Vol. 22, pp. 21-31.

Danaher, P.J. (1997), “Using conjoint analysis to determine the relative importance of serviceattributes measured in customer satisfaction surveys”, Journal of Retailing, No. 2,pp. 235-60.

Drew, J.H. and Bolton, R.N. (1991), “The structure of customer satisfaction: effects of surveymeasurement”, Journal of Consumer Satisfaction, Dissatisfaction and ComplainingBehavior, No. 4, pp. 101-8.

Gronroos, C. (1984), “A service quality model and its marketing implications”, European Journalof Marketing, No. 4, pp. 36-44.

Glorfeld, L.W. and Fowler, G.C. (1988), “A multivariate methodology for simultaneouslycapturing and clustering judgment policies”, Decision Sciences, No. 1, pp. 504-20.

Hair, F.J., Anderson, R.E. and Tatham, R.L. (1992), Multivariate Data Analysis with Readings,Macmillan Publishing Company, New York, NY.

Headley, D.E. and Miller, S.J. (1993), “Measuring service quality and its relationship to futureconsumer behavior”, Journal of Health Care Marketing, No. 4, pp. 32-41.

Higie, R., Feick, L.F. and Price, L.L. (1987), “Types and amount of word of mouthcommunications about retailers”, Journal of Retailing, Fall, pp. 260-78.

Iacobucci, D. and Ostrom, A. (1993), “Gender differences in the impact of core and relationalaspects of servies on the evaluation of service encounters”, Journal of ConsumerPsychology, No. 3, pp. 257-86.

Jamal, A. and Nasser, K. (2002), “Customer satisfaction and retail banking: an assessment ofsome of the key antecedents of customer satisfaction in retail banking”, InternationalJournal of Bank Marketing, No. 4, pp. 146-60.

Lassar, W.M., Manolis, C. and Winsor, R.D. (2000), “Service quality perspectives and satisfactionin private banking”, International Journal of Bank Marketing, No. 4, pp. 181-9.

Levesque, T. and McDougall, G.H.G. (1996), “Determinants of customer satisfaction in retailbanking”, International Journal of Bank Marketing, No. 7, pp. 12-20.

Lloyd-Walker, B. and Cheung, Y.P. (1998), “IT to support service quality excellence in theAustralian banking industry”, Managing Service Quality, No. 5, pp. 350-8.

McDougall, G.H.G. and Levesque, T.J. (1994), “A revised view of service quality dimensions: anempirical investigation”, Journal of Professional Services Marketing, No. 1, pp. 189-209.

Magi, A. and Julander, C.R. (1996), “Perceived service quality and customer satisfaction in a storeperformance framework”, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, No. 1, pp. 33-41.

Marshall, K.P. and Smith, J.R. (1999), “Race-ethnic variations in the importance of service qualityissues in the neighbourhood consumer banking”, Journal of Professional ServicesMarketing, No. 2, pp. 119-31.

Mersha, T. and Adlaka, V. (1992), “Attributes of service quality: the consumers’ perspective”,International Journal of Service Industry Management, No. 3, pp. 34-45.

Newman, K. and Cowling, A. (1996), “Service quality in retail banking: the experience of twoBritish clearing banks”, International Journal of Bank Marketing, No. 6, pp. 3-11.

Nunnally, J.C. (1978), Psychometric Theory, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.

Oliver, R.L. (1981), “Measurement and evaluation of satisfaction process in retail settings”,Journal of Retailing, Vol. 57 No. 3, pp. 25-48.

IJBM22,2

156

Oliver, R.L. (1993), “A conceptual model of service quality and service satisfaction: compatiblegoals, different concepts”, in Swartz, T.A., Bowen, D.A. and Brown, S.W. (Eds), Advancesin Services Marketing and Management, Vol. 2, JAI Press, New York, NY, pp. 65-85.

Olsson, J. (1996), “Management of cultural change at the German universal bank”, in Schuster, L.(Ed.), Banking Cultures of the World, Fritz Knapp, Frankfurt a.M., pp. 385-402.

Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V.A. and Berry, L.L. (1988), “SERVQUAL: a multipleitem scale formeasuring consumer perceptions of service quality”, Journal of Retailing, Spring, pp. 12-40.

Parker, C. and Mathews, B.P. (2001), “Customer satisfaction: contrasting academic andcustomers’ interpretations”, Marketing Intelligence & Planning, No. 1, pp. 38-44.

Salmony, M. and Denck, M.A. (1999), “Multibanking: Auf dem Weg zur neuen Bank”, HarvardBusiness Manager, No. 1, pp. 66-74.

Szallies, R. (1998), “Vagabundierendes Finanzverhalten – die wachsende Herausforderung furdas Marketing im Privatkundengeschaft”, in Betsch, O., Hooven, E.v. and Krupp, G. (Eds),Handbuch Privatkundengeschaft, Fritz Knapp, Frankfurt a.M., pp. 275-86.

Thompson, B. (1984), Canonical Correlation Analysis: Uses and Interpretation, Sage Publications,Newbury Park, CA.

Yavas, U. and Yasin, M.M. (2001), “Enhancing organizational performance in banks: asystematic approach”, Journal of Services Marketing, No. 6, pp. 444-53.

Yavas, U., Bilgin, Z. and Shemwell, D.J. (1997), “Service quality in the banking sector in anemerging economy: a consumer survey”, International Journal of Bank Marketing, No. 6,pp. 217-23.

Zeithaml, V.A., Berry, L.L. and Parasuraman, A. (1996), “The behavioral consequences of servicequality”, Journal of Marketing, April, pp. 31-46.

Private bankcustomers in

Germany

157