SERVICE QUALITY VERSUS CUSTOMER SATISFACTION

Get Complete Project Material File(s) Now! »

SERVICE QUALITY VERSUS CUSTOMER SATISFACTION

In an era of increased competition and, the service sector being the dominant sector in world economy, it is apparent that companies would focus upon service quality and customer satisfaction improvement issues in order to drive high levels of business performance (Bitner & Brown, 2008:40; Kumar, Smart, Maddern & Maull, 2008:176; Morgan & Rego, 2006:436). It is however, common to find unclear distinctions between service quality and customer satisfaction in the literature (Bateson & Hoffman, 2011:325; Tsoukatos & Rand, 2007:469) but Van Ossel, Stremersch and Gemmel (2003:124) believe 31 that it is an important distinction to make. The distinction is also important for Cronin and Taylor (1992:56) as they state that it is important for service providers to know “whether their objective should be to have consumers who are ‘satisfied’ with their performance or to deliver the maximum level of ‘perceived service quality’”.
Many researchers have traditionally viewed service quality and customer satisfaction as equivalent constructs because of the considerable overlap between the two concepts, (Bansal & Taylor, 1997; Hernon in Marx, 2005:10; Johnson & Gustafsson, 2000; Spreng & Singh, 1993). Today, however, there is some degree of consensus among researchers that service quality and customer satisfaction are distinctive constructs, although they do admit that the constructs are related (Al-Hawari & Ward, 2006:131; Anandanatarajan et al., 2006:87; Bateson & Hoffman, 2011:325; Berry et al., 1988; Fisk et al., 2008; Homburg et al., 2006; Kasper et al., 2006:182; Parasuraman et al., 1994).

Meaning of services

The concept of a service has changed considerably during the last thirty years. Initially, it was argued that a service can be defined by emphasising the differences between goods and services by referring to the characteristics of services. The early debate about the differences between services and goods tended to encourage the notion that services and physical goods are an either-or dichotomy (Fisk et al., 2008:6). Although the distinction between pure goods and pure services is not always very clear, (Bateson & Hoffman, 2011:4), they are not distinct.
There is an important interdependence between services and goods, where some services may require physical goods to support and facilitate the delivery system and some physical goods may have intangible aspects. Services are being arrayed on a continuum of intangibility, with pure services (which have no tangible component) at the one extreme of the continuum, and pure goods (which have no intangible component) at the other extreme (Shostack, 1977:74). Since several services have both tangible and intangible elements, those services will fall between the two extremes of the continuum (Bateson & Hoffman, 2011:5; Fisk et al., 2008:6; Lovelock & Wirtz, 2011:15; Schneider & White, 2004:7). Services offered by landlords to their tenants probably are a good example of a service that fall between the two extremes of the intangibility continuum.

Intangibility

There is no doubt that intangibility is the most fundamental and most frequently mentioned of the various characteristics of a service (Bateson & Hoffman, 2011:57; Fisk et al., 2008:7; Kasper et al., 2006:57; Schneider & White, 2004:6; Zeithaml, Parasuraman & Berry, 1985:33). This characteristic in essence means that services are activities and not physical objects. In most cases services cannot be seen, touched, tasted, held, felt or stored (Bateson & Hoffman, 2011:57; Fisk et al., 2008:8; Hollensen, 2010:394; Kotler & Armstrong, 2010:269; La, Patterson & Styles, 2005:380; Wilson et al., 2008:16; Young, 2008:73). According to Bateson and Hoffman (2011:57), intangibility is the basic characteristic of services from which all other differences emerge. Bateson and Hoffman (2011:57) further make a distinction between physical intangibility, that which cannot be touched, and mental intangibility, that which cannot be mentally grasped. Bielen and Sempels (in Edvardsson et al., 2005:114) support this conceptualisation by an empirical study. Fisk et al. (2008:8) and La et al. (2005:380) point out though, that services are not merely an “intangible product” but a state of being and that an experience, performance, time, process or some form of intellectual property cannot be purchased by a customer but they can still get value out of this intangibility.

Inseparability

Inseparability in relation to services implies that the production and consumption are inseparable and occur simultaneously (Bateson & Hoffman, 2011:63; Evans & Lindsay, 2008:59; Fisk et al., 2008:8; Hollensen, 2010:395; Kasper et al., 2006:58; Lewis, 2009:234; Schneider & White, 2004:7; Sierra, Heiser & McQuitty, 2009:111; Wilson et al., 2008:16; Young, 2008:76). The inseparability of services therefore leads to a relatively small time-gap between production and consumption, and the services are often consumed as they are produced. The customer has to be present during the production of many services and the customer is forced into intimate contact with the production process (Kotler & Armstrong, 2010:269; Wilson et al., 2008:17).

Perishability

Perishability, like in the case with tangibility, means that because services are not tangible they cannot be produced at a certain point in time, stored, and then sold later when demanded (Bateson & Hoffman, 2011:71; Fisk et al., 2008:9; Hollensen, 2010:394; Kasper et al., 2006:60; Lewis, 2009:235; Vargo & Lusch, 2004:331; Young, 2008:78). Services therefore, have to be consumed when produced and if it is not consumed it perishes. Although perishability exists for goods as well, perishability of services is more critical and more difficult to overcome. Service organisations is therefore more seriously affected by changes in demand because, when demand is low, unused capacity is wasted and the opportunity to maximise profit has gone forever, and when demand is higher than the capacity, it goes unfulfilled and business may be lost (Bateson & Hoffman, 2011:72; Fisk et al., 2008:10; Hollensen, 2010:395; Kasper et al., 2006:60; Kotler & Armstrong, 2010:270; Wilson et al., 2008:17; Young, 2008:78). It is therefore important for service firms to manage demand and supply in order to better meet their needs.

READ Least squares model for visual element selection and matching

QUALITY

When it comes to customers that have to choose among competing products and services, quality has become one of the most important decision factors (Montgomery, Jennings & Pfund, 2011:2). Quality also plays an important role in assuring the safety of the customers. The phenomenon of quality is widespread and understanding and improving quality are key factors leading to business success, growth and competitiveness (Dale, Van der Wiele & Van Iwaarden, 2009:18; Evans & Lindsay, 2008:9; Kasper et al., 2006:175; Montgomery et al., 2011:2; Sower, 2011:3; Starcke, 2006:80). It is common knowledge that there is a substantial return on investment from improved quality and, from successfully employing quality as an integral part of overall business strategy.

TABLE OF CONTENT :

DECLARATION
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
ABSTRACT
LIST OF FIGURES
LIST OF TABLES
CHAPTER 1: BACKGROUND AND DEFINITION OF THE STUDY
- 1.1 INTRODUCTION
- 1.2 BACKGROUND AND IMPORTANCE OF THE STUDY
- 1.3 LITERATURE REVIEW
- 1.4 THE RESEARCH PROBLEM
- 1.5 PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
- 1.6 RESEARCH OBJECTIVES
- 1.6.1 Primary objective
- 1.6.2 Secondary objectives
- 1.7 HYPOTHESES
- 1.8 RESARCH METHODOLOGY
- 1.8.1 Sample selection and size
- 1.8.2 Design of the study
- 1.9 IMPORTANCE AND BENEFITS OF THE STUDY
- 1.10 STRUCTURE OF THE STUDY
- 1.11 ABBREVIATIONS
- 1.12 REFEENCING TECHNIQUE
CHAPTER 2: SERVICES AND AN INTRODUCTION TO QUALITY
- 2.1 INTRODUCTION
- 2.2 SERVICE QUALITY VERSUS CUSTOMER SATISFACTION
- 2.3 SERVICES
- 2.3.1 Meaning of services
- 2.3.2 Characteristics of services
- 2.3.2.1 Intangibility
- 2.3.2.2 Heterogeneity
- 2.3.2.3 Inseparability
- 2.3.2.4 Perishability
- 2.4 QUALITY
- 2.4.1 The meaning of quality
- 2.4.1.1 The transcendent approach
- 2.4.1.2 The product-based approach
- 2.4.1.3 The user-based approach
- 2.4.1.4 The manufacturing-based approach
- 2.4.1.5 The value-based approach
- 2.4.2 Concluding remarks on quality
- 2.5 CONCLUSION
CHAPTER 3: SERVICE QUALITY
- 3.1 INTRODUCTION
- 3.2 THE CONCEPT OF PERCEIVED QUALITY
- 3.3 SERVICE QUALITY DEFINED
- 3.4 A REVIEW OF SELECTED SERVICE QUALITY MODELS
- 3.4.1 The Grönroos service quality model
- 3.4.2 The SERVQUAL model of service quality
- 3.4.3 Performance only model of Cronin and Taylor (SERVPERF)
- 3.4.4 Haywood-Farmer’s conceptual model of service quality
- 3.4.5 The dynamic process model of Boulding, Kalra, Staelin and Zeithaml
- 3.4.6 The three-component model of Rust and Oliver
- 3.4.7 The return-on-quality approach of Rust, Zahorik and Keiningham
- 3.4.8 The P-C-P service attribute model of Philip and Hazlett
- 3.4.9 Dabholkar, Shepherd and Thorpe’s antecedents model
- 3.4.10 The hierarchical approach of Brady and Cronin
- 3.4.11 Grönroos’s model as adapted by Kang and James
- 3.4.12 Kang’s hierarchical structure of service quality
- 3.4.13 Carr’s FAIRSERV model
- 3.4.14 Other service quality models
- 3.5 CONCLUSION
CHAPTER 4: SMALL BUSINESS TENANTS IN SHOPPING CENTRES
- 4.1 INTRODUCTION
- 4.2 INTRODUCTION TO SHOPPING CENTRES
- 4.3 DEFINITION OF A SHOPPING CENTRE
- 4.4 TYPES OF SHOPPING CENTRES
- 4.4.1 Small free standing and convenience centres
- 4.4.2 Neighbourhood centres
- 4.4.3 Community centres
- 4.4.4 Small regional shopping centres/Large community shopping centres
- 4.4.5 Regional centres
- 4.4.6 Super regional centres
- 4.4.7 Lifestyle centres
- 4.4.8 Value/strip centres
- 4.4.9 Hyper centres
- 4.5 SHOPPING CENTRES AS INVESTMENTS
- 4.6 SHOPPING CENTRE MANAGEMENT
- 4.7 THE IMPORTANCE OF TENANT MIX
- 4.8 THE LANDLORD-TENANT RELATIONSHIP IN A SHOPPING CENTRE
- 4.9 LANDLORD-TENANT CONTRACT OF LEASE
- 4.10 DEFINITION OF SMALL BUSINESS
- 4.11 THE ROLE OF SMALL BUSINESSES IN SHOPPING CENTRES
- 4.11.1 Lack of business knowledge
- 4.11.2 Inadequate finances
- 4.11.3 Inferior customer service
- 4.11.4 Poor merchandising
- 4.12 CONCLUSION
CHAPTER 5: RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY
- 5.1 INTRODUCTION
- 5.2 THE RESEARCH PROBLEM
- 5.3 THE RESEARCH OBJECTIVES
- 5.3.1 Primary objective
- 5.3.2 Secondary objectives
- 5.4 HYPOTHESES
- 5.4.1 Hypotheses testing
- 5.5 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
- 5.5.1 Research design
- 5.5.2 Sampling design and data collection methods
- 5.5.2.1 Sample error
- 5.5.2.2 Response rate
- 5.5.2.3 Data collection
- 5.5.3 Purpose of the study
- 5.5.4 Time dimension
- 5.5.5 Topical scope
- 5.5.6 The research environment
- 5.5.7 Participants’ perceptions
- 5.6 QUESTIONNAIRE DESIGN, VALIDITY AND MEASUREMENT
- 5.6.1 Measurement of the research instrument
- 5.6.2 Characteristics of sound measurement
- 5.6.2.1 Validity of the measurement instrument
- 5.6.2.2 Reliability of the measurement instrument
- 5.6.2.3 Factor analysis
- 5.7 DATA PROCESSING AND ANALYSIS
- 5.7.1 Descriptive statistics
- 5.7.2 Inferential statistics
- 5.7.3 Statistical significance
- 5.8 CONCLUSION
CHAPTER 6: RESEARCH FINDINGS
- 6.1 INTRODUCTION
- 6.2 DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS
- 6.3 RESPONDENTS’ PERCEIVED SERVICE QUALITY FROM LANDLORDS
- 6.4 VALIDITY AND RELIABILITY OF THE MEASURING INSTRUMENT
- 6.5 PERCEIVED SERVICE QUALITY ACCORDING TO THE TWO FACTORS
- 6.6 ONE-WAY ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE (ANOVA)
- 6.7 RESPONSE TO OPEN-ENDED QUESTIONS
- 6.7.1 Reasons for selecting the shopping centre
- 6.7.2 Most positive features of landlord’s service
- 6.7.3 Most negative features of landlord’s service
- 6.7.4 Reasons for remaining in the shopping centre
- 6.7.5 Conclusion
- 6.8 CONCLUSION
CHAPTER 7: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
- 7.1 INTRODUCTION
- 7.2 SUMMARY OF THE CHAPTERS
- 7.2.1 Background and definition of the study
- 7.2.2 Services and an introduction to quality
- 7.2.3 Service quality
- 7.2.4 Small business tenants in shopping centres
- 7.2.5 Research design and methodology
- 7.2.6 Research findings
- 7.3 RESEARCH OBJECTIVES REVISITED
- 7.3.1 Primary objective revisited
- 7.3.2 Secondary objectives revisited
- 7.4 RESEARCH QUESTIONS REVISITED
- 7.5 HYPOTHESES REVISITED
- 7.4 CONTRIBUTION/NEW KNOWLEDGE GENERATED BY THE STUDY
- 7.5 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY
- 7.6 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH
- 7.7 CONCLUSION
- 8. REFERENCES
- APPENDIX A: Informed consent form
- APPENDIX B: Data collection instrument
- APPENDIX C: Comments from small business tenants
- APPENDIX D: Details of reliability analysis