A conceptual model of service quality and its implications for future research

A.Parasuraman, Valarie A. Zeithaml, Leonard L. Berry

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

Abstract
The attainment of quality in products & services became pivotal in 1980s. Quality in tangible goods can be described & measured by marketers, quality in services is largely undefined & unresearched. PZB attempted to rectify by reporting the insights obtained in an extensive exploratory investigation of quality in four service businesses & by developing a model of service quality (SQ) and propositions.

Introduction
Crosby (1979) said Quality is ballet, not hockey, quality is an 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 in contributing to market share, ROI, lowering manufacturing costs, improving productivity. Only a handful of researches have focused on SQ.

Objectives of Study
Reviewing the small number of existing studies that have investigated SQ. Reporting the insights obtained in an extensive exploratory investigation of quality in four service business. Developing a conceptual model of SQ. Offering propositions to stimulate future research about quality.

Existing knowledge about SQ

Efforts in defining & measuring quality have come largely from the goods sectors. Japanese philosophy quality is zero defects, doing it right the first time. Crosby (1979) defines quality as conformance to requirements. Garvin (1983) measures quality by counting the incidence of internal failures & external failures. knowledge about goods quality is insufficient to understand service quality.

Existing knowledge about SQ (Cont.)

Heterogeneity

Intangibility

Inseparability

Intangibility

1. Intangibility

Characteris tics of services Heterogeneity Inseparability

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 understand how consumers perceive their services & evaluate SQ (Zeithaml, 1981)

Intangibility

2. Heterogeneity

Characteris tics of services Heterogeneity Inseparability

Service performance varies from producer to producer, from customer to customer, and from day to day. Consistency of behavior from service personnel is difficult to assure because what the firm intends to deliver may be entirely different from what the consumer receives.

Intangibility

3.Inseparability

Characteris tics of services Heterogeneity Inseparability

Production & consumption of many services are inseparable. In labor intensive services, quality occurs during service delivery, usually in an interaction between the client and the contact person from the service firm. The consumers input becomes critical to the quality of service performance. (e.g., haircuts & doctors visits)

A handful literature on SQ suggest three themes

SQ is more difficult for consumer to evaluate than goods quality. SQ perceptions result from a comparison of consumer expectations with actual service performance. Quality evaluations are not made on the outcomes of a service; also involve evaluations of the process of service delivery.

SQ More Difficult to Evaluate

Purchasing goods, consumer employs many tangible cues to judge quality: such as style, color, design, packaging. Purchasing services, fewer tangible cues exist because tangible evidence is limited to the service providers physical facilities, equipment, and personnel. In absence of tangible evidence, price becomes a pivotal quality indicator.

Quality Is a Comparison between Expectations & Performance

Service quality is a measure of how well the service level delivered matches customer expectations. Delivering quality service means conforming to customer expectations on a consistent basis (Lewis & Booms, 1983)

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 than outcomes; it also includes the manner in which the service is delivered.

Quality Evaluation Involve Outcomes & Processes (Cont.)

Two types of SQ: (Gronroos,1982)
(1) technical quality - what the customer is actually receiving from the 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.

Exploratory Investigation
Because 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-depth interviews with executives were conducted to develop a conceptual model of SQ.

Insights about the Questions:

What do managers perceive to be the key attributes of SQ? What do consumers perceive to be the key attributes of SQ? Do discrepancies exist between the perceptions of consumers & service marketers? Can consumer & marketer perceptions be combined in a general model that explains SQ from consumer standpoint?

() 1 3 2 4

Insights from Exploratory Investigation

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 gap

Proposition 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

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

Gap 3 SQ specification service delivery gap
Its so hard to maintain standardized quality. Difficulty in adhering to formal standards or specifications for maintaining SQ

Proposition 3
The gap between SQ specifications and actual service delivery will affect service quality from consumers standpoint

Insights from Exploratory Investigation

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

Gap 5 Expected service perceived service gap Judgments of high and low service quality depend on how consumers perceive the actual service performance in the context of what they expected Proposition 5 The quality that a consumer perceives in a service is a function of the magnitude and direction of the gap between expected service and perceived service

A Service Quality Model

Proposition 6
Gap 5 = f(Gap1, Gap2, Gap3, Gap4) The magnitude and direction of each gap will have an impact on service quality

The Perceived Service Quality Component

The focus groups revealed that consumers used basically similar criteria in evaluating SQ These criteria fall into 10 key categories

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

Determinants of perceived service quality

W.O.M
Personal need Past Experience

Determinants of perceived Service quality

Expected Service Perceived service quality Perceived service

Difference in evaluation of goods and service

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

--search goods, consumer can determine prior to purchasing a

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

--experience properties, only be discerned after purchase or during 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

10 service quality determinants v.s properties of consumer goods

Most service contain few search properties and high in experience and credence properties Most of dimensions of service quality were experience properties: --access, courtesy, reliability, responsiveness, understandingknowing the customer, and communication Credence properties consumer cannot evaluate even after purchase --competence, security

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 a continuum range from ideal quality to totally unacceptable quality, with some point along the continuum representing satisfactory quality. The discrepancy between the expected service (ES)and perceived service (PS).

Proposition 8:
ES>PS, perceived quality is less than satisfactory and will tend toward totally unacceptable quality, with increased discrepancy between ES and PS. ES=PS, perceived quality is a satisfactory ES<PS, perceived quality is more than satisfactory and will tend toward ideal quality , with increased discrepancy between ES and PS.

Directions for Future Research

A need and an opportunity to develop a standard instrument to measure consumers service quality perceptions. Consumers quality perceptions are influenced by a series of distinct gaps occurring on the marketers side. Examine the nature of the association between service quality as perceived 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 service quality in addition to being influenced by a marketers communications, is shaped by word-of mouth communications, personal needs, and past experience.

Summary
Exploratory research (insights, propositions) 10 dimensions exceptions and perceptions Four key discrepancies or gap on the service providers side Conceptual service quality model

AeSL, Ambient e-Service Lab

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

Research Topics: SOA & SSME (service science)

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