All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
defines quality as \"conformance to requirements.\" Garvin (1983) measures quality by counting the in- cidence of \"internal\" failures (those observed before a product leaves the factory) and \"external\" failures in the field after a unit has been in- (those incurred stalled). Knowledge about goods quality, however, is in- sufficient to understand service quality. Three well- documented characteristics of services-intangibility, and inseparability-must be acknowl- heterogeneity, of service quality. edged for a full understanding First, most services are intangible (Bateson 1977, Berry 1980, Lovelock 1981, Shostak 1977). Because they are performances rather than objects, precise uniform manufacturing specifications concerning quality can rarely be set. Most services cannot be counted, measured, inventoried, tested, and verified in advance of sale to assure the quality. Because of intangibility, firm may find it difficult to understand how con- sumers perceive their services and evaluate service quality (Zeithaml 1981). Second, services, especially those with a high la- bor content, are heterogeneous: their often performance varies from producer to producer, from customer to customer, and from day to day. Consistency of be- havior from service personnel (i.e., uniform quality) is difficult to assure (Booms and Bitner 1981) because what the firm intends to deliver may be entirely dif- ferent from what the consumer receives. and consumption of many ser- Third, production vices are inseparable (Carmen and Langeard 1980, Gronroos 1978, Regan 1963, Upah 1980). As a con- sequence, quality in services is not engineered at the manufacturing plant, then delivered intact to the con- sumer. In labor intensive services, for example, qual- ity occurs during service delivery, usually in an in- teraction between the client and the contact from person the service firm (Lehtinen and Lehtinen 1982). The service firm control over may also have less managerial in is in- quality services where consumer participation tense (e.g., haircuts, doctor's visits) because the client affects the process. In these situations, the consumer's of how the haircut should look, de- input (description of symptoms) becomes critical to the quality scription of service performance. Service quality has been discussed in only a hand- ful of writings (Gronroos 1982; Lehtinen and Lehti- nen 1982; Lewis and Booms 1983; Sasser, Olsen, and of these Wyckoff 1978). Examination and other writings literature on services suggests three themes: underlying * Service quality is more difficult for the con- sumer to evaluate than goods quality. * Service quality perceptions result from a com- parison of consumer expectations with actual service performance. 42 / Journal of Marketing, Fall 1985 * Quality evaluations are not made solely on the outcome of a service; they also involve evalu- ations of the process of service delivery. Service Quality More Difficult to Evaluate When purchasing goods, the consumer employs many cues to tangible judge quality: style, hardness, color, label, feel, package, fit. When purchasing services, fewer tangible cues exist. In most cases, tangible evi- dence is limited to the service provider's physical fa- cilities, equipment, and personnel. In the absence of tangible evidence on which to evaluate consumers must on other cues. quality, depend The nature of these other cues has not been investi- gated by researchers, although some authors have suggested that price becomes a pivotal quality indi- cator in situations where other information is not available (McConnell 1968, Olander 1970, Zeithaml 1981). Because of service intangibility, a firm may find it more difficult to understand how consumers perceive services and service quality. \"When a ser- vice provider knows how [the service] will be eval- uated by the consumer, we will be able to suggest how to influence these evaluations in a desired direc- tion\" (Gronroos 1982). Is a Comparison between Quality Expectations and Performance Researchers and managers of service firms concur that service quality involves a comparison of expectations with performance: Service is a measure of how well the service quality level delivered matches customer De- expectations. service means to cus- livering quality conforming tomer on a consistent basis. (Lewis and expectations Booms 1983) In line with this thinking, Gronroos (1982) developed a model in which he contends that consumers compare the service they expect with perceptions of the service service quality. they receive in evaluating Smith and Houston (1982) claimed that satisfac- tion with services is related to confirmation or dis- confirmation of expectations. They based their re- search on the disconfirmation paradigm, which maintains that satisfaction is related to the size and direction of the disconfirmation where dis- experience confirmation is related to the person's initial expec- tations (Churchill and Suprenaut 1982). Evaluations Involve Outcomes and Quality Processes Sasser, Olsen, and Wyckoff (1978) discussed three different dimensions of service performance: levels of material, facilities, and personnel. Implied in this tri- is the notion that service involves chotomy more quality than outcome; it also includes the manner in which This content downloaded from 202.192.158.248 on Mon, 04 May 2015 13:19:39 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
the service is delivered. This notion surfaces in other research on service quality as well. that two types Gronroos, for example, postulated of service quality exist: technical quality, which in- volves what the customer is actually receiving from the service, and functional quality, which involves the manner in which the service is delivered (Gronroos 1982). Lehtinen and Lehtinen's (1982) basic premise is that service quality is produced in the interaction be- tween a customer and elements in the service orga- nization. They use three quality dimensions: physical which includes the physical aspects of the ser- quality, vice (e.g., equipment or building); corporate quality, which involves the company's image or profile; and interactive quality, which derives from the interaction between contact personnel and customers as well as between some customers and other customers. They further differentiate between the quality associated with the process of service delivery and the quality asso- ciated with the outcome of the service. and maintenance. While this set of ser- product repair vice businesses is not exhaustive, it represents a cross- section of industries which vary along key dimensions used to categorize services (Lovelock 1980, 1983). For example, retail banking and securities brokerage services are more \"high contact services\" than the other two types. The nature and results of the service act are more tangible for product and maintenance repair services than for the other three types. In terms of service discrete transactions characterize credit delivery, card services and product and maintenance ser- repair vices to a greater extent than the other two types of services. Executive Interviews A nationally recognized company from each of the four service businesses participated in the study. In- depth personal interviews comprised of open-ended questions were conducted with three or four execu- tives in each firm. The executives were selected from marketing, operations, senior management, and cus- tomer relations because each of these areas could have an impact on quality in service firms. The respondents held titles such as president, senior vice president, di- rector of customer relations, and manager of con- sumer market research. Fourteen executives were in- terviewed about a broad of service quality issues range (e.g., what they perceived to be service quality from the consumer's perspective, what steps they took to control or improve service quality, and what problems they faced in delivering high quality services). Because the literature on service quality is not yet rich for enough to provide a sound conceptual foundation investigating service quality, an exploratory qualita- tive study was undertaken to investigate the concept of service quality. Specifically, focus group inter- views with consumers and in-depth interviews with executives were conducted to develop a conceptual model of service quality. The approach used is con- sistent with procedures recommended for marketing theory development by several scholars (Deshpande Peter and Olson 1983; Zaltman, 1983; and LeMasters, Heffring 1982). interviews of executives in four nation- In-depth ally recognized service firms and a set of focus group interviews of consumers were conducted to gain in- sights about the following questions: * What do managers of service firms perceive to be the key attributes of service quality? What problems and tasks are involved in providing high quality service? * What do consumers perceive to be the key at- tributes of quality in services? * Do discrepancies exist between the perceptions of consumers and service marketers? * Can consumer and marketer perceptions be combined in a general model that explains ser- vice quality from the consumer's standpoint? Service Categories Investigated Four service categories were chosen for investigation: retail banking, credit card, securities brokerage, and Exploratory Investigation Focus Group Interviews A total of 12 focus group interviews was conducted, three for each of the four selected services. Eight of the focus groups were held in a metropolitan area in the southwest. The remaining four were conducted in the vicinity of the participating companies' headquar- ters and were therefore across the country: one spread on the West Coast, one in the Midwest, and two in the East. The focus groups were formed in accordance with followed in the marketing re- guidelines traditionally search field (Bellenger, Berhardt, and Goldstucker were screened to ensure that they 1976). Respondents were current or recent users of the service in question. To maintain homogeneity and assure maximum par- were assigned to groups based ticipation, respondents on age and sex. Six of the twelve groups included only males and six included only females. At least one male group and one female group were inter- viewed for each of the four services. Consistency in within groups; however, age di- age was maintained versity across groups for each service category was established to ascertain the viewpoints of a broad cross section of consumers. A Conceptual Model of Service Quality / 43 This content downloaded from 202.192.158.248 on Mon, 04 May 2015 13:19:39 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Identities of participating firms were not revealed to focus group participants. Discussion about quality of a given service centered on consumer experiences and perceptions to that service in general, as relating to the specific service of the participating firm opposed in that service category. Questions asked by the mod- erator covered topics such as instances of and reasons for satisfaction and dissatisfaction with the service; of an ideal service (e.g., ideal bank or descriptions ideal credit the meaning of service quality; card); fac- tors important in evaluating service quality; perfor- mance expectations concerning the service; and the role of price in service quality. FIGURE 1 Service Quality Model CONSUMER Insights from Exploratory Investigation Executive Interviews consistent from the four Remarkably patterns emerged sets of executive interviews. While some perceptions about service quality were specific to the industries selected, commonalities among the industries pre- vailed. The commonalities are encouraging for they suggest that a general model of service quality can be developed. the most important insight obtained from Perhaps the executive responses is the following: analyzing A set of key discrepancies or gaps exists re- garding executive perceptions of service qual- ity and the tasks associated with service de- livery to consumers. These gaps can be major hurdles in attempting to deliver a service which consumers would perceive as being of high quality. shown in the lower portion (i.e., the MARKETER side) I * Privacy or confidentiality during transactions in every emerged as a pivotal quality attribute focus group. banking and securities brokerage mentioned in the Rarely was this consideration executive interviews. * The physical and security features of credit cards (e.g., the likelihood that unauthorized people could use the cards) generated substantial dis- cussion in the focus group interviews but did not emerge as critical in the executive inter- views. The gaps revealed by the executive interviews are of Figure 1. This figure summarizes the key insights the focus group as well as executive gained (through interviews) about the concept of service quality and factors affecting it. The remainder of this section dis- cusses the gaps on the service marketer's side (GAPI, GAP2, GAP3, and GAP4) and presents im- propositions plied by those gaps. The consumer's side of the ser- vice quality model in Figure I is discussed in the next section. Consumer expectation-management perception gap (GAPI): Many of the executive perceptions about what * The product and maintenance focus groups repair indicated that a large repair service firm was unlikely to be viewed as a high quality firm. Small independent repair firms were consis- tently associated with high quality. In contrast, most executive comments indicated that a firm's size would signal strength in a quality context. In essence, service firm executives may not always understand what features connote high quality to con- sumers in advance, what features a service must have in order to meet consumer needs, and what levels of on those features are needed to deliver performance high quality service. This insight is consistent with research in services, which suggests that ser- previous vice marketers what con- may not always understand sumers et al. 1981, Pa- expect in a service (Langeard rasuraman and Zeithaml 1982). This lack of under- consumers expect in a quality service were congruent with the consumer revealed in the focus expectations groups. However, discrepancies between executive and consumer perceptions expectations existed, as il- lustrated by the following examples: 44 / Journal of Marketing, Fall 1985 This content downloaded from 202.192.158.248 on Mon, 04 May 2015 13:19:39 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
of consumers: standing may affect quality perceptions 1: The gap between consumer Proposition expectations and management perceptions of those expecta- tions will have an impact on the consumer's evaluation of service quality. interviews in all four service firms was the difficulty experienced in attempting to match or exceed con- sumer Executives cited constraints which expectations. them from delivering what the consumer ex- prevent service pects. As an example, executives in the repair firm were fully aware that consumers view quick re- as a vital ingredient sponse to appliance breakdowns of high quality service. However, they find it difficult to establish specifications to deliver quick response service per- consistently because of a lack of trained sonnel and wide fluctuations in demand. As one ex- ecutive observed, peak demand for repairing air con- ditioners and lawnmowers occurs during the summer months, precisely when most service personnel want to go on vacation. In this and numerous other situa- tions, knowledge of consumer exists but expectations the perceived means to deliver to expectations appar- ently do not. Apart from resource and market constraints, an- other reason for the gap between expectations and the actual set of specifications established for a service is the absence of total management commitment to ser- vice quality. Although the executive interviews indi- cated a genuine concern for quality on the part of interviewed, this concern may not be gen- managers eralizable to all service firms. In discussing product Management perception-service quality specifi- cation gap (GAP2): A recurring theme in the executive services well and treating consumers correctly, high quality service performance may not be a certainty. Executives recognize that a service firm's employees exert a strong influence on the service quality per- ceived by consumers and that employee performance cannot always be standardized. When asked what causes service quality problems, executives consis- mentioned the pivotal role of contact tently personnel. In the repair and maintenance for firm, example, one executive's immediate response to the source of ser- vice quality problems was, \"Everything involves a to maintain stan- person-a repair person. It's so hard dardized quality.\" Each of the four firms had formal standards or specifications for maintaining service quality (e.g., answer at least 90% of phone calls from consumers within 10 seconds; keep error rates in statements be- to these standards because of variability in adhering This problem leads to a third employee performance. proposition: low 1%). However, each firm reported difficulty in Service quality specifications-service delivery gap (GAP3): Even when guidelines exist for performing 3: The gap between service qual- Proposition ity specifications and actual service delivery will affect service quality from the con- sumer's standpoint. by a firm can affect consumer expectations. If expec- tations play a major role in consumer perceptions of service quality (as the services literature contends), the firm must be certain not to promise more in com- munications than it can deliver in reality. Promising more than can be delivered will raise initial expecta- tions but lower perceptions of quality when the prom- ises are not fulfilled. The executive interviews suggest another perhaps more intriguing way in which external communica- tions could influence service quality perceptions by consumers. This occurs when companies neglect to inform consumers of special efforts to assure quality that are not visible to consumers. Comments of sev- eral executives implied that consumers are not always aware of everything done behind the scenes to serve them well. For instance, a securities brokerage executive mentioned a \"48-hour rule\" from prohibiting employees or selling securities for their accounts buying personal for the first 48 hours after information is supplied by the firm. The firm did not communicate this infor- mation to its customers, to a per- perhaps contributing that \"all the good deals are probably ception made by the brokers for themselves\" (a perception which sur- A Conceptual Model of Service / 45 Quality Service delivery-external communications gap (GAP4): Media advertising and other communications that management attached to quality problems [var- ies]. It's one thing to say you believe in defect-free to take time from a busy products, but quite another schedule to act on that belief and stay informed\" (p. Garvin's observations are likely to apply to ser- 68). vice businesses as well. In short, a variety of factors-resource con- straints, market conditions, and/or management in- difference-may result in a discrepancy between of consumer management and perceptions expectations the actual established for a service. This specifications is predicted to affect quality perceptions discrepancy of consumers: 2: The gap between management Proposition perceptions of consumer ex- pectations and the firm's ser- vice quality specifications will affect service quality from the consumer's viewpoint. quality, Garvin (1983) stated: \". .. the seriousness This content downloaded from 202.192.158.248 on Mon, 04 May 2015 13:19:39 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
faced in the securities brokerage focus groups). One bank executive indicated that consumers were un- aware of the bank's behind the counter, on-line teller terminals which would \"translate into visible effects on customer consumers aware service.\" of not Making service related standards such as these readily apparent could improve service quality Consumers perceptions. who are aware that a firm is taking concrete steps to serve their best interests are likely to perceive a de- livered service in a more favorable way. In short, external communications can affect not only consumer expectations about a service but also consumer perceptions of the delivered service. Alter- between service delivery and natively, discrepancies external communications-in the form of exaggerated promises and/or the absence of information about ser- vice delivery aspects intended to serve consumers well-can affect consumer perceptions of service quality. 4: The gap between actual ser- Proposition vice delivery and external communications about the ser- vice will affect service quality from a consumer's standpoint. were described in every focus group. It by consumers that of high and low service quality appears judgments on how consumers depend perceive the actual service in the context of what they expected. performance 5: The quality that a consumer Proposition perceives in a service is a function of the magnitude and direction of the gap between expected service and per- ceived service. Insights obtained from the executive interviews and the focus groups form the basis of a model summa- and determinants of service quality rizing the nature as perceived by consumers. The foundation of this model is the set of gaps discussed earlier and shown in Figure 1. Service quality as perceived by a con- sumer on the size and direction depends of GAP5 which, in turn, depends on the nature of the gaps associated with the design, marketing, and delivery of services: services: 6: GAPS = Proposition f(GAPl,GAP2,GAP3,GAP4) A Service Quality Model Focus Group Interviews As was true of the executive interviews, the responses of focus group about service quality were participants consistent across groups and across ser- remarkably vice businesses. While some service-specific differ- ences were revealed, common themes emerged- themes which offer valuable insights about service of consumers. quality perceptions The focus groups the notion unambiguously supported that the key to ensuring good service quality is meet- or ing exceeding what consumers expect from the ser- vice. One female described a situation when participant a repairman not only fixed her broken appliance but also explained what had gone wrong and how she could fix it herself if a similar problem occurred in the fu- ture. She rated the quality of this service excellent be- cause it exceeded her expectations. A male respond- ent in a banking services focus group described the frustration he felt when his bank would not cash his check from a nationally payroll known employer be- cause it was postdated by one day. When someone else in the group pointed out legal constraints pre- venting the bank from cashing his check, he re- sponded, \"Well, nobody in the bank explained that to me!\" Not receiving an explanation in the bank, this that the bank respondent was unwilling perceived rather than unable to cash the check. This in turn resulted in a perception of poor service quality. Similar experiences, both positive and negative, 46 / Journal of Marketing, Fall 1985 Expected service-perceived service gap (GAP5): It is important to note that the gaps on the mar- keter side of the equation can be favorable or unfa- vorable from a service quality perspective. That is, the magnitude and direction of each gap will have an when actual service delivery exceeds spec- favorable ifications; it will be unfavorable when service speci- fications are not met. While proposition 6 suggests a between service quality as perceived by relationship consumers and the gaps occurring on the marketer's form of the relationship side, the functional needs to be investigated. This point is discussed further in the last section dealing with future research directions. The Perceived Service Quality Component The focus groups revealed that, regardless of the type of service, consumers used basically similar criteria in evaluating service quality. These criteria seem to fall into 10 key categories which are labeled \"service and described in Table 1. For quality determinants\" each determinant, Table 1 provides examples of ser- vice specific criteria that in the focus groups. emerged Table 1 is not meant to suggest that the 10 determi- nants are non-overlapping. Because the research was measurement of exploratory, possible overlap across the 10 criteria (as well as determination of whether some can be combined) must await future empirical The consumer's view of service quality is shown in the upper of Figure 1 and further part elaborated in investigation. impact on service quality. For instance, GAP3 will be This content downloaded from 202.192.158.248 on Mon, 04 May 2015 13:19:39 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
TABLE 1 Determinants of Service Quality RELIABILITY involves consistency of performance and dependability. It means that the firm performs the service right the first time. It also means that the firm honors its promises. Specifically, it involves: -accuracy in billing; -keeping records correctly; -performing the service at the designated time. RESPONSIVENESS concerns the willingness or readiness of employees to provide service. It involves timeliness of ser- vice: -mailing a transaction slip immediately; -calling the customer back quickly; -giving prompt service (e.g., setting up appointments quickly). COMPETENCE means possession of the required skills and knowledge to perform the service. It involves: -knowledge and skill of the contact personnel; -knowledge and skill of operational support personnel; -research capability of the organization, e.g., securities brokerage firm. ACCESS involves approachability and ease of contact. It means: -the service is easily accessible by telephone (lines are not busy and they don't put you on hold); -waiting time to receive service (e.g., at a bank) is not extensive; -convenient hours of operation; -convenient location of service facility. COURTESY involves politeness, respect, consideration, and friendliness of contact personnel (including receptionists, telephone operators, etc.). It includes: -consideration for the consumer's property (e.g., no muddy shoes on the carpet); -clean and neat appearance of public contact personnel. COMMUNICATION means keeping customers informed in language they can understand and listening to them. It may mean that the company has to adjust its language for different consumers-increasing the level of sophistication with a well-educated customer and speaking simply and plainly with a novice. It involves: -explaining the service itself; -explaining how much the service will cost; -explaining the trade-offs between service and cost; -assuring the consumer that a problem will be handled. CREDIBILITY involves trustworthiness, believability, honesty. It involves having the customer's best interests at heart. to credibility are: Contributing -company name; -company reputation; -personal characteristics of the contact personnel; -the degree of hard sell involved in interactions with the customer. SECURITY is the freedom from danger, risk, or doubt. It involves: -physical safety (Will I get mugged at the automatic teller machine?); -financial security (Does the company know where my stock certificate is?); -confidentiality (Are my dealings with the company private?). UNDERSTANDING/KNOWING THE CUSTOMER involves making the effort to understand the customer's needs. It involves: -learning the customer's specific requirements; -providing individualized attention; -recognizing the regular customer. TANGIBLES include the physical evidence of the service: -physical facilities; -appearance of personnel; -tools or equipment used to provide the service; -physical representations of the service, such as a plastic credit card or a bank statement; -other customers in the service facility. Figure 2. Figure 2 indicates that perceived service quality is the result of the consumer's comparison of expected service with perceived service. It is quite possible that the relative importance of the 10 deter- minants in molding consumer expectations (prior to service delivery) may differ from their relative im- portance vis-a-vis consumer perceptions of the deliv- ered service. However, the general comparison of ex- pections with perceptions was suggested in past research on service quality (Gronroos 1982, Lehtinen and Leh- tinen 1982) and supported in the focus group inter- views with consumers. The comparison of expected A Conceptual Model of Service Quality / 47 This content downloaded from 202.192.158.248 on Mon, 04 May 2015 13:19:39 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
FIGURE 2 Determinants of Perceived Service Quality and perceived service is not unlike that performed by consumers when evaluating goods. What differs with of the characteristics services is the nature upon which they are evaluated. One framework for isolating differences in eval- uation of quality for goods and services is the clas- sification of properties of goods proposed by Nelson (1974) and Darby and Karni (1973). Nelson distin- of con- guished between two categories of properties sumer goods: search properties, attributes which a consumer can determine a prod- prior to purchasing which can uct, and experience properties, attributes after purchase or during consump- only be discerned tion. Search include attributes such as color, properties style, price, fit, feel, hardness, and smell, while ex- include characteristics such as taste, perience properties and dependability. wearability, Darby and Kari (1973) added to Nelson's two- way classification system a third category, credence properties-characteristics which the consumer may find impossible to evaluate even after purchase and of offerings high in credence consumption. Examples include appendectomies and brake properties relinings on automobiles. Few consumers possess medical or mechanical skills sufficient to evaluate whether these services are necessary or are performed even properly, after they have been prescribed and produced by the seller. Consumers in the focus groups mentioned search, and credence properties when asked to experience, describe and define service quality. These aspects of service quality can be categorized into the 10 service determinants shown in Table 1 and can be ar- quality rayed along a continuum ranging from easy to eval- uate to difficult to evaluate. In general, offerings high in search properties are easiest to evaluate, those high in experience properties more difficult to evaluate, and those high in credence hardest to evaluate. Most services contain properties few search properties and are high in experience and credence properties, making their quality more diffi- cult to evaluate than of goods (Zeithaml 1981). quality Only two of the ten determinants-tangibles and credibility-can be known in advance of purchase, of search few. properties thereby making the number Most of the dimensions of service quality mentioned were experience prop- by the focus group participants erties: access, courtesy, reliability, responsiveness, the customer, and commu- understanding/knowing nication. Each of these determinants can only be known as the customer is purchasing or consuming the ser- vice. While customers may possess some information based on their or on other customers' eval- experience uations, they are likely to reevaluate these determi- nants each time a purchase is made because of the of services. heterogeneity Two of the determinants that surfaced in the focus group interviews probably fall into the category of credence properties, those which consumers cannot evaluate even after purchase and consumption. These include of the required skills (the competence possession and knowledge to perform the service) and security from danger, are (freedom risk, or doubt). Consumers never certain of these attributes, even after probably of the service. consumption Because few search properties exist with services and because credence properties are too difficult to evaluate, the following is proposed: 7: Consumers typically rely on Proposition experience properties when evaluating service quality. Based on insights from the present study, per- ceived service quality is further posited to exist along a continuum from ideal quality to totally un- ranging acceptable quality, with some point along the contin- uum representing satisfactory quality. The position of a consumer's of service quality on the con- perception tinuum of the discrepancy be- depends on the nature tween the expected service (ES) and perceived service (PS): 8: (a) When ES > PS, perceived Proposition is less than satisfactory quality and will tend toward totally unacceptable quality, with in- creased discrepancy between ES and PS; (b) when ES = PS, perceived quality is satisfac- tory; (c) when ES < PS, per- ceived quality is more than 48 / Journal of Marketing, Fall 1985 This content downloaded from 202.192.158.248 on Mon, 04 May 2015 13:19:39 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
satisfactory and will tend to- ward ideal quality, with in- creased discrepancy between ES and PS. Directions for Future Research The proposed service quality model (Figure 1) pro- in an area where little vides a conceptual framework research has been done. It is based on an inter- prior a num- of qualitative data generated through pretation fo- and consumer ber of in-depth executive interviews cus groups-an approach consistent with procedures recommended for marketing theory development. The model and the propositions emerging from conceptual it imply a rich agenda for further research. is a need and an opportunity to develop there First, a standard instrument to measure consumers' service The authors' research exploratory quality perceptions. revealed 10 evaluative dimensions or criteria which transcend a variety of services (Table 1). Research is now needed to generate items or statements to flesh out the 10 dimensions, to devise appropriate rating scales to measure with respect consumers' perceptions to each statement, and to condense the set of state- ments to produce a reliable and comprehensive but concise instrument. the statements Further, generated should be such that with appropriate changes in word- ing, the same instrument can be used to measure per- ceived quality for a variety of services. the main thesis of the service model Second, quality is that consumers' quality perceptions are influenced on the market- by a series of distinct gaps occurring ers' side. A key challenge for researchers is to devise methods to measure these gaps accurately. Reliable and valid measures of these gaps will be necessary for empirically testing the propositions implied by the model. Third, research is needed to examine the nature of the association between service quality as per- ceived by consumers and its determinants (GAPS 1-4). are one or more of these Specifically, gaps more crit- ical than the others in affecting quality? Can creating one \"favorable\" gap-e.g., making GAP4 favorable by employing effective external communications to create realistic consumer expectations and to enhance consumer perceptions-offset service quality prob- lems stemming from other differences gaps? Are there across service industries regarding the relative seri- ousness of service quality problems and their impact on quality as perceived by consumers? In addition to offering valuable managerial insights, answers to questions like these may suggest refinements to the model. proposed Fourth, the usefulness of segmenting consumers on the basis of their service quality expectations is worth exploring. Although the focus groups consis- tently revealed similar criteria for judging service quality, the group participants differed on the relative importance of those criteria to them, and their expec- tations along the various quality dimensions. Empir- whether distinct, ical research aimed at determining identifiable service quality segments exist will be valuable from a service marketer's viewpoint. In this it will be useful to build into the service qual- regard, for as- statements ity measurement instrument certain whether, and in what ways, consumer ex- certaining differ. pectations Fifth, as shown by Figure 1, expected service-a critical component of perceived service quality-in addition to being influenced by a marketer's com- is shaped by word-of-mouth communi- munications, cations, personal needs, and past experience. Re- search of these factors focusing on the relative impact on consumers' service expectations, within as well as across service categories, will have useful managerial implications. Summary The exploratory research (focus group and in-depth executive interviews) reported in this article offers several insights and propositions concerning con- sumers' perceptions of service quality. Specifically, the research revealed 10 dimensions that consumers use in forming expectations about and perceptions of different types of services, dimensions that transcend services. The research also pinpointed four key dis- or gaps on the service provider's side that crepancies are likely to affect service quality as perceived by consumers. The major the re- insights gained through search service quality model that suggest a conceptual will hopefully spawn both academic and practitioner interest in service quality and serve as a framework for further research in this important area. empirical REFERENCES Anderson, Carl and Carl P. Zeithaml (1984), \"Stage of the Product Life Cycle, Business Strategy, and Business Per- formance,\" Academy of Management Journal, 27 (March), 5-24. A Conceptual Model of Service / 49 Quality This content downloaded from 202.192.158.248 on Mon, 04 May 2015 13:19:39 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Bateson, John E. G. (1977), \"Do We Need Service Market- ing?,\" in Marketing Consumer Services: New Insights, Cambridge, MA: Marketing Science Institute, Report #77- 115. Bellenger, Danny N., Kenneth L. Berhardt, and Jac L. Gold- stucker (1976), Qualitative Research in Marketing, Chi- cago: American Marketing. Berry, Leonard L. (1980), \"Services Marketing Is Different,\" Business, 30 (May-June), 24-28. Booms, Bernard H. and Mary J. Bitner (1981), \"Marketing for Services Firms,\" Strategies and Organization Structures in Marketing of Services, J. Donnelly and W. George, eds., Chicago: American Marketing, 47-51. Carmen, James M. and Eric Langeard (1980), \"Growth Strat- egies of Service Firms,\" Strategic Management Journal, 1 (January-March), 7-22. Churchill, G. A., Jr., and C. Suprenaut (1982), \"An Inves- tigation into the Determinants of Customer Satisfaction,\" Journal of Marketing Research, 19 (November), 491-504. Crosby, Philip B. (1979), Quality Is Free: The Art of Making Quality Certain, New York: New American Library. Darby, M. R. and E. Karni (1973), \"Free Competition and the Optimal Amount of Fraud,\" Journal of Law and Eco- nomics, 16 (April), 67-86. Deshpande, Rohit (1983), \"'Paradigms Lost': On Theory and Method in Research in Marketing,\" Journal of Marketing, 47 (Fall), 101-110. Garvin, David A. (1983), \"Quality on the Line,\" Harvard Business Review, 61 (September-October), 65-73. Gronroos, Christian (1978), \"A Service-Oriented Approach to Marketing of Services,\" European Journal of Marketing, 12 (no. 8), 588-601. (1982), Strategic Management and Marketing in the Service Sector, Helsingfors: Swedish School of Economics and Business Administration. C. Olson, and Rafael A. Haddock (1973), Jacoby, Jacob, Jerry \"Price, Brand Name and Product Composition Character- istics as Determinants of Perceived Quality,\" Journal of Applied Psychology, 55 (no. 6), 570-579. Langeard, Eric, John E. G. Bateson, Christopher H. Love- lock, and Pierre Eiglier (1981), Service Marketing: New Insights from Consumers and Managers, Cambridge, MA: Marketing Science Institute. Lehtinen, Uolevi and Jarmo R. Lehtinen (1982), \"Service Quality: A Study of Quality Dimensions,\" unpublished working paper, Helsinki: Service Management Institute, Finland OY. Leonard, Frank S. and W. Earl Sasser (1982), \"The Incline of Quality,\" Harvard Business Review, 60 (September-Oc- tober), 163-171. Lewis, Robert C. and Bernard H. Booms (1983), \"The Mar- keting Aspects of Service Quality,\" in Emerging Perspec- tives on Services Marketing, L. Berry, G. Shostack, and G. Upah, eds., Chicago: American Marketing, 99-107. Lovelock, Christopher H. (1980), \"Towards a Classification of Services,\" in Theoretical Developments in Marketing, C. Lamb and P. Dunne, eds., Chicago: American Market- ing, 72-76. (1981), \"Why Marketing Management Needs to be Different for Services,\" in Marketing of Services, J. Don- nelly and W. George, eds., Chicago: American Marketing, 5-9. (1983), \"Classifying Services to Gain Strategic Marketing Insights,\" Journal of Marketing, 47 (Summer), 9-20. McConnell, J. D. (1968), \"Effect of Pricing on Perception of Product Quality,\" Journal of Applied Psychology, 52 (Au- gust), 300-303. Monroe, Kent B. and R. Krishnan (1983), \"The Effect of Price on Subjective Product Evaluations,\" Blacksburg: Virginia Polytechnic Institute, working paper. Nelson, P. (1974), \"Advertising as Information,\" Journal of Political Economy, 81 (July/August), 729-754. Olander, F. (1970), \"The Influence of Price on the Consum- er's Evaluation of Products,\" in Pricing Strategy, B. Taylor and G. Wills, eds., Princeton, NJ: Brandon/Systems Press. Parasuraman, A. and Valarie A. Zeithaml (1982), \"Differ- ential Perceptions of Suppliers and Clients of Industrial Ser- vices,\" in Emerging Perspectives on Services Marketing, L. Berry, G. Shostack, and G. Upah, eds., Chicago: Amer- ican Marketing, 35-39. Peter, J. Paul and Jerry C. Olson (1983), \"Is Science Mar- keting?,\" Journal of Marketing, 47 (Fall), 111-125. Phillips, Lynn W., Dae R. Chang, and Robert D. Buzzell (1983), \"Product Quality, Cost Position, and Business Per- formance: A Test of Some Key Hypotheses,\" Journal of Marketing, 47 (Spring), 26-43. Rabin, Joseph H. (1983), \"Accent Is on Quality in Consumer Services This Decade,\" Marketing News, 17 (March 4), 12. Regan, William J. (1963), \"The Service Revolution,\" Journal of Marketing, 27 (July), 57-62. Sasser, W. Earl, Jr., R. Paul Olsen, and D. Daryl Wyckoff (1978), Management of Service Operations: Text and Cases, Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Shapiro, Bensen (1972), \"The Price of Consumer Goods: The- ory and Practice,\" Cambridge, MA: Marketing Science In- stitute, working paper. Shostack, G. Lynn (1977), \"Breaking Free from Product Mar- keting,\" Journal of Marketing, 41 (April), 73-80. Smith, Ruth A. and Michael J. Houston (1982), \"Script-Based Evaluations of Satisfaction with Services,\" in Emerging Perspectives on Services Marketing, L. Berry, G. Shos- tack, and G. Upah, eds., Chicago: American Marketing, 59-62. Takeuchi, Hirotaka and John A. Quelch (1983), \"Quality Is More Than Making a Good Product,\" Harvard Business Review, 61 (July-August), 139-145. Upah, Gregory D. (1980), \"Mass Marketing in Service Re- tailing: A Review and Synthesis of Major Methods,\" Jour- nal of Retailing, 56 (Fall), 59-76. Zaltman, Gerald, Karen LeMasters, and Michael Heffring (1982), Theory Construction in Marketing: Some Thought on Thinking, New York: Wiley. Zeithaml, Valarie A. (1981), \"How Consumer Evaluation Pro- cesses Differ between Goods and Services,\" in Marketing of Services, J. Donnelly and W. George, eds., Chicago: American Marketing, 186-190. 50 / Journal of Marketing, Fall 1985 This content downloaded from 202.192.158.248 on Mon, 04 May 2015 13:19:39 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
因篇幅问题不能全部显示，请点此查看更多更全内容