8/2/2019 Katrina_2006_09_25

1/34

A conceptual model of service quality andA conceptual model of service quality and

its implications for future researchits implications for future research

A.Parasuraman,Valarie A. Zeithaml,

Leonard L. Berry

Journal of Marketing Vol. 49(Fall 1985), 41-50.

8/2/2019 Katrina_2006_09_25

2/34

Abstract

The attainment of quality in products & servicesbecame pivotal in 1980s.

Quality in tangible goods can be described &measured by marketers, quality in services is largelyundefined & unresearched.

PZB attempted to rectify by reporting the insightsobtained in an extensive exploratory investigation of

quality in four service businesses & by developing amodel of service quality (SQ) andpropositions.

8/2/2019 Katrina_2006_09_25

3/34

Introduction

Crosby (1979) said Quality is ballet, not hockey, quality isan elusive (intangible) & indistinct (obscure) construct.

Researchers often bypass definitions & use unidimensional

self-report measures to capture quality.

Research has demonstrated the strategic benefits of quality incontributing to market share, ROI, lowering manufacturing

costs, improving productivity.

Only a handful of researches have focused on SQ.

8/2/2019 Katrina_2006_09_25

4/34

Objectives of Study

Reviewing the small number ofexisting studies that haveinvestigated SQ.

Reporting the insights obtained in an extensiveexploratory investigation of quality in four service business.

Developing a conceptual model of SQ.

Offeringpropositions to stimulate future research aboutquality.

8/2/2019 Katrina_2006_09_25

5/34

Existing knowledge about SQ

Efforts in defining & measuring quality have come largelyfrom the goods sectors.

Japanese philosophyquality iszero defects, doing it rightthe first time.

Crosby (1979) defines quality as conformance torequirements.

Garvin (1983) measures quality by counting the incidence

ofinternal failures & external failures.

knowledge about goods quality is insufficient to understandservice quality.

8/2/2019 Katrina_2006_09_25

6/34

Existing knowledge about SQ (Cont.)

Heterogeneity

InseparabilityIntangibility

8/2/2019 Katrina_2006_09_25

7/34

1. Intangibility

Most services are intangible (Beteson ,1977 etc.)

Most services cannot be counted, measured,

inventoried, tested, and verified in advance of sale

to assure quality.

Because of intangibility, the firm may find it

difficult to understandhow consumers perceivetheir services & evaluate SQ (Zeithaml, 1981)

Intangibility

HeterogeneityInseparability

Characteristics of

services

8/2/2019 Katrina_2006_09_25

8/34

2. Heterogeneity

Service performance varies from producer to

producer, from customer to customer, and fromday to day.

Consistency of behavior from service personnel

is difficult to assure because what thefirm intendsto deliver may be entirely differentfrom what theconsumer receives.

Intangibility

HeterogeneityInseparability

Characteristics of

services

8/2/2019 Katrina_2006_09_25

9/34

3.Inseparability

Production & consumption of many services are

inseparable.In labor intensive services, quality occurs during

service delivery, usually in an interaction betweenthe client and the contact person from the servicefirm.

The consumers input becomes critical to thequality of service performance. (e.g., haircuts &doctors visits)

Intangibility

HeterogeneityInseparability

Characteristics of

services

8/2/2019 Katrina_2006_09_25

10/34

A handful literature on SQ suggest three

themes

SQ ismore difficult for consumerto evaluate

than goods quality.SQ perceptions result from a comparison ofconsumer expectations with actual service

performance.Quality evaluations are not made on the

outcomes of a service; also involve evaluations oftheprocess of service delivery.

8/2/2019 Katrina_2006_09_25

11/34

SQ More Difficult to Evaluate

Purchasing goods, consumer employs manytangible

cues to judge quality: such as style, color, design,packaging.

Purchasing services, fewer tangible cues exist because

tangible evidence is limited to the service providersphysical facilities, equipment, and personnel.

In absence of tangible evidence,price becomes a pivotal

quality indicator.

8/2/2019 Katrina_2006_09_25

12/34

Quality Is a Comparison between

Expectations & Performance

Service quality is a measure of how well the servicelevel delivered matches customer expectations.

Delivering quality service means conforming tocustomer expectations on a consistent basis (Lewis& Booms, 1983)

8/2/2019 Katrina_2006_09_25

13/34

Quality Evaluation Involve Outcomes &

Processes

Three different dimensions of service performance: levels

of material, facilities, & personnel.(Sasser et al., 1978).

This trichotomy implied that service quality involves

more thanoutcomes; it also includesthe manner inwhich the service is delivered.

8/2/2019 Katrina_2006_09_25

14/34

Quality Evaluation Involve Outcomes &

Processes (Cont.)

Two types of SQ: (Gronroos,1982)

(1)technical quality - what the customer is actually receiving fromthe service (outcome);

(2)functional quality - the manner in which the service is delivered

(process).Three quality dimensions: (Lehtinen & Lehtinen,1982)

(1) physical quality e.g. equipment;

(2) corporate quality companys image;

(3) interactive quality interaction between contact personnel &customers.

8/2/2019 Katrina_2006_09_25

15/34

Exploratory InvestigationBecause the literature on SQ is not yet rich enough to

provide a sound conceptual foundation for

investigating SQ, an exploratory qualitative study was

undertaken to investigate the concept of SQ.

Focus group interviews with consumers & in-depthinterviews with executives were conducted to develop a

conceptual model of SQ.

8/2/2019 Katrina_2006_09_25

16/34

Insights about the Questions:

What domanagers perceive to be the key attributes of SQ?

What doconsumers perceive to be the key attributes ofSQ?

Dodiscrepancies exist between the perceptions of

consumers & service marketers?Can consumer & marketer perceptions be combined inageneral modelthat explains SQ from consumer standpoint?

8/2/2019 Katrina_2006_09_25

17/34

8/2/2019 Katrina_2006_09_25

18/34

()

1

2

3

4

5

8/2/2019 Katrina_2006_09_25

19/34

Executive Interviews

A set of gaps exists regarding executive perceptions of service quality and

the tasks associated with service delivery to consumers

Gap1:

Consumer expectation management perception gapProposition 1:

The gap between consumer expectations and management

perceptions of those expectations will have an impact on the

consumers evaluation of service quality

Insights from Exploratory Investigation

8/2/2019 Katrina_2006_09_25

20/34

Gap2:

Management perception SQ specification gap

Proposition 2 :

The gap between management perceptions of consumer

expectations and the firms SQ specifications will affect service

quality from consumers viewpoint

Insights from Exploratory Investigation

8/2/2019 Katrina_2006_09_25

21/34

Gap 3

SQ specification service delivery gap

Its so hard to maintain standardized quality.

Difficulty in adhering to formal standards or specifications formaintaining SQ

Proposition 3

The gap between SQ specifications and actual service

delivery will affect service quality from consumers standpoint

Insights from Exploratory Investigation

8/2/2019 Katrina_2006_09_25

22/34

Gap 4

Service delivery external communications gap

Media advertising and other communication (eg. slogan)

Proposition 4

The gap between actual service delivery and external

communications about the service will affect service quality

from a consumers standpoint

Insights from Exploratory Investigation

8/2/2019 Katrina_2006_09_25

23/34

Gap 5

Expected service perceived service gap

Judgments of high and low service quality depend on howconsumers perceive the actual service performance in thecontext of what they expected

Proposition 5The quality that a consumer perceives in a service is afunction of the magnitude and direction of the gap between

expected service and perceived service

Insights from Exploratory Investigation

8/2/2019 Katrina_2006_09_25

24/34

Proposition 6

Gap 5 = f(Gap1, Gap2, Gap3, Gap4)

The magnitude and direction of each gap will have an impact onservice quality

The Perceived Service Quality ComponentThe focus groups revealed that consumers used basically similarcriteria in evaluating SQ

These criteria fall into 10 key categories

A Service Quality Model

8/2/2019 Katrina_2006_09_25

25/34

Determinants of service quality

Reliability, consistency of performance and dependability

Responsiveness, willingness or readiness of employees to provide service

Competence, required skill and knowledge to perform the service

Access, approachability and ease of contact

Courtesy, politeness, respect, consideration, and friendliness

Communication, keeping customers informed in language they can understand

Credibility, trustworthiness, believability, honesty

Security, freedom from danger, risk, or doubt

Understanding/knowing, understand customers need

Tangible, physical evidence of the service

8/2/2019 Katrina_2006_09_25

26/34

Determinants of perceived service quality

W.O.MPast

Experience

Personalneed

ExpectedService

Perceivedservice

Perceivedservicequality

Determinants

of

perceived

Service

quality

8/2/2019 Katrina_2006_09_25

27/34

Difference in evaluation of goods and service

Two categories of properties of consumer goods(Nelson,1974)

--search goods, consumer can determine prior to purchasing aproduct.

-- properties such as color,style, price, fit, feel, hardness, and smell

--experience properties, only be discerned after purchase orduring consumption

-- properties include taste, wearability, and dependability.

Added third category (Darby & Karni,1973)

--credence properties, consumer may find impossible to evaluate

even after purchase and consumption

8/2/2019 Katrina_2006_09_25

28/34

10 service quality determinants v.s properties

of consumer goodsMost service contain few search properties and high inexperience and credence properties

Most of dimensions of service quality were experienceproperties:

--access, courtesy, reliability, responsiveness,

understandingknowing the customer, and communicationCredence properties consumer cannot evaluate even afterpurchase

--competence, security

8/2/2019 Katrina_2006_09_25

29/34

10 service quality determinants v.s properties

of consumer goods

Proposition 7:

Consumer typically rely on experience properties when

evaluating service quality

Perceived service quality posit to exist along acontinuum range from ideal quality to totallyunacceptable quality, with some point along thecontinuum representing satisfactory quality.

The discrepancy between the expected service (ES)andperceived service (PS).

8/2/2019 Katrina_2006_09_25

30/34

Proposition 8:

ES>PS, perceived quality is less than satisfactory andwill tend toward totally unacceptable quality, withincreased discrepancy between ES and PS.

ES=PS, perceived quality is a satisfactory

ES

8/2/2019 Katrina_2006_09_25

31/34

Directions for Future ResearchA need and an opportunity to develop a standard instrument tomeasure consumers service quality perceptions.

Consumers quality perceptions are influenced by a series ofdistinct gaps occurring on the marketers side.

Examine the nature of the association between service quality asperceived by consumers and its determinants.

The usefulness of segmenting consumers on the basis of their

service quality expectations is worth exploring.

Expected servicea critical component of perceived servicequalityin addition to being influenced by a marketers

communications, is shaped by word-ofmouth communications,personal needs, and past experience.

8/2/2019 Katrina_2006_09_25

32/34

Summary

Exploratory research (insights, propositions)

10 dimensions exceptions and perceptions

Four key discrepancies or gap on the serviceproviders side

Conceptual service quality model

8/2/2019 Katrina_2006_09_25

33/34

8/2/2019 Katrina_2006_09_25

34/34

Please visit our website:http://www.aesl.nccu.edu.tw

Research Topics: SOA & SSME (service science)

AeSL, Ambient e-Service Lab

64, Sec. 2,Zhi-nan Rd., Wenshan, Taipei 116, Taiwan, Republic of China,Commerce Building 5F