• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Parsu lab2002pp
 

Parsu lab2002pp

on

  • 547 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
547
Views on SlideShare
547
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
7
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  • 11
  • 8

Parsu lab2002pp Parsu lab2002pp Presentation Transcript

  • TRI/SERVQUAL/LibQUAL+TM A. Parasuraman University of Miami Library Assessment and Benchmarking Institute (LAB 2002) Monterey, CA September 13, 2002© A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the author’s permission
  • Defining, Assessing, and Measuring Service Quality: A Conceptual Overview© A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the author’s permission 2
  • Multi-Phase, Multi-Sector, Multi-Year Program of Research to Address the Following Issues • How do customers perceive and evaluate service quality? • What are managers’ perceptions about service quality? • Do discrepancies exist between the perceptions of customers and those of managers? • Can customers’ and managers’ perceptions be combined into a general model of service quality? • How can service organizations improve customer service and achieve excellence?© A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the author’s permission 3
  • Determinants of Perceived Service Quality Word of Personal Past Mouth Needs Experience External Expected Communication Service to Customers Service Quality Perceived Gap Service Quality Perceived Service© A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the author’s permission 4
  • A “GAPS” MODEL OF SERVICE QUALITY CUSTOMER SERVICE ORGANIZATION Market Organization’s Service Information Understanding of Standards Gap Expectations Gap Customers’ Service Organization’s Expectations GAP 1 Service Standards GAP 2 Service Service Quality GAP 5 Performance Gap GAP 3 Gap GAP 4 Organization’s Customers’ Service Service Performance Perceptions Organization’s Internal Communications to Communication Customers Gap© A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the author’s permission 5
  • PROCESS MODEL FOR CONTINUOUS MEASUREMENT AND IMPROVEMENT OF SERVICE QUALITY DO YOUR CUSTOMERS PERCEIVE YES CONTINUE TO MONITOR YOUR OFFERINGS AS MEETING CUSTOMERS’ EXPECTATIONS OR EXCEEDING THEIR EXPECTATIONS? AND PERCEPTIONS NO DO YOU HAVE AN ACCURATE NO TAKE CORRECTIVE ACTION UNDERSTANDING OF CUSTOMERS’ EXPECTATIONS? YES ARE THERE SPECIFIC NO TAKE CORRECTIVE ACTION STANDARDS IN PLACE TO MEET CUSTOMERS’ EXPECTATIONS? YES DO YOUR OFFERINGS MEET OR NO TAKE CORRECTIVE ACTION EXCEED THE STANDARDS? YES NO IS THE INFORMATION TAKE CORRECTIVE ACTION COMMUNICATED TO CUSTOMERS ABOUT YOUR OFFERINGS ACCURATE? YES© A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the author’s permission 6
  • SERVQUAL: Development, Refinement, and Empirical Findings© A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the author’s permission 7
  • Determinants of Perceived Service QualityDimensions of Service Word of Personal Past Quality Mouth Needs Experience1. Access2. Communication3. Competence External4. Courtesy Expected Communication5. Credibility Service to Customers6. Reliability7. Responsiveness Service Perceived Quality Service8. Security Gap Quality9. Tangibles10. Understanding/Knowing the Customer Perceived Service© A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the author’s permission 8
  • Correspondence between SERVQUAL Dimensions and Original Ten Dimensions for Evaluating Service Quality Original Ten SERVQUAL Dimensions Dimensions for Evaluating Service Quality TANGIBLES RELIABILITY RESPONSIVENESS ASSURANCE EMPATHY TANGIBLES RELIABILITY RESPONSIVENESS COMPETENCE COURTESY CREDIBILITY SECURITY ACCESS COMMUNICATION UNDERSTANDING/ KNOWING THE CUSTOMER© A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the author’s permission 9
  • Definitions of the SERVQUAL Dimensions • Tangibles: Appearance of physical facilities, equipment, personnel, and communication materials. • Reliability: Ability to perform the promised service dependably and accurately. • Responsiveness: Willingness to help customers and provide prompt service. • Assurance: Knowledge and courtesy of employees and their ability to inspire trust and confidence. • Empathy: Caring, individualized attention the firm provides its customers.© A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the author’s permission 10
  • Relative Importance of Service Dimensions When Respondents Allocate 100 Points [Study 1] RELIABILITY 32% TANGIBLES 11%RESPONSIVENESS 22% EMPATHY 16% ASSURANCE 19%© A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the author’s permission 11
  • Relative Importance of Service Quality Dimensions [Study 2] Mean Number of Points Allocated out of 100 Points 37 33 32 11 14 23 9 23 21 13 15 18 15 19 18Computer Manufacturer All Companies Retail Chain 29 28 12 12 23 23 17 18 19 20 Auto Insurer Life Insurer Reliability Responsiveness Assurance Empathy Tangibles© A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the author’s permission 12
  • Mean SERVQUAL Scores by Service Dimension [Study 1] 1.00 0.00 -1.00 -2.00 Tangibles Reliability Responsive- Assurance Empathy ness© A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the author’s permission 13
  • Nature of Service Expectations Level Customers Desired Service Believe Can and Should Be Delivered Zone of Tolerance Minimum Level Adequate Service Customers Are Willing to Accept© A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the author’s permission 14
  • The Two Levels of Expectations Imply Two Corresponding Measures of GAP 5: Measure of Service Perceived Adequate = - Adequacy (MSA) Service Service Measure of Service Perceived Desired = - Superiority (MSS) Service Service© A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the author’s permission 15
  • TWO APPROACHES FOR MEASURING MSA AND MSS • Two-Column Format Questionnaire – Direct measures of MSA and MSS • Three-Column Format Questionnaire – Difference-score measures of MSA and MSS© A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the author’s permission 16
  • TWO-COLUMN FORMAT Please think about the quality of service ________ offers compared to the two different levels of service defined below: MINIMUM SERVICE LEVEL - the minimum level of service performance you consider adequate. DESIRED SERVICE LEVEL - the level of service performance you desire. For each of the following statements, please indicate: (a) how ______’s performance compares with your minimum service level by circling one of the numbers in the first column; and (b) how ______’s performance compares with your desired service level by circling one of the numbers in the second column. Compared to My Minimum Compared to My Desired Service Level ____’s Service Level ____’s Service Performance is: Service Performance is: The No The No When it comes to … Lower Same Higher Opin- Lower Same Higher Opin- ion ion 1. Prompt service 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 N 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 N to policyholders 2. Employees who are 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 N 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 N consistently courteous© A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the author’s permission 17
  • THREE-COLUMN FORMAT We would like your impressions about ________’s service performance relative to your expectations. Please think about the two different levels of expectations defined below: MINIMUM SERVICE LEVEL - the minimum level of service performance you consider adequate. DESIRED SERVICE LEVEL - the level of service performance you desire. For each of the following statements, please indicate: (a) your minimum service level by circling one of the numbers in the first column; and (b) your desired service level by circling one of the numbers in the second column; and (c) your perception of ___________’s service by circling one of the numbers in the third column. My Minimum My Desired My Perception Service Service of ____’s Service Level is: Level is: Performance is: No When it comes to … Low High Low High Low High Opin- ion 1. Prompt service 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 N to policyholders 2. Employees who are 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 N consistently courteous© A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the author’s permission 18
  • Measurement Error: Percent of Respondents Answering Incorrectly Type of Two-Column Three-Column Company Format Format Computer Manufacturer 8.6% 0.6% Retail Chain 18.2% 1.8% Auto Insurer 12.2% 1.6% Life Insurer 9.9% 2.7%© A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the author’s permission 19
  • Mean Service Quality Scores (Combined Across All Companies) TWO-COLUMN FORMAT THREE-COLUMN FROMAT QUESTIONNAIRE QUESTIONNAIRE SERVQUAL Dimensions MSA Scores MSS Scores MSA Scores MSS Scores Reliability 6.8 5.9 0.2 -1.0 Responsiceness 6.7 5.7 0.3 -1.1 Assurance 6.8 5.9 0.4 -0.9 Empathy 6.5 5.6 0.2 -1.2 Tangibles 7.1 6.4 1.1 -0.2© A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the author’s permission 20
  • Revised SERVQUAL Items Reliability 1. Providing services as promised 2. Dependability in handling customers service problems 3. Performing services right the first time 4. Providing services at the promised time 5. Keeping customers informed about when services will be performed Responsiveness 6. Prompt service to customers Tangibles 7. Willingness to help customers 17. Modern equipment 8. Readiness to respond to customers requests 18. Visually appealing facilities 19. Employees who have a neat, professional appearance Assurance 20. Visually appealing materials associated with the service 9. Employees who instill confidence in customers 21. Convenient business hours 10. Making customers feel safe in their transactions 11. Employees who are consistently courteous 12. Employees who have the knowledge to answer customer questions Empathy 13. Giving customers individual attention 14. Employees who deal with customers in a caring fashion 15. Having the customers best interest at heart 16.Employees who understand the needs of their customers© A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the author’s permission 21
  • Service Quality Perceptions Relative to Zones of Tolerance by Dimension Computer Manufacturer 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Reliability Responsiveness Assurance Empathy Tangibles Zone of Tolerance S.Q. Perception© A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the author’s permission 22
  • Service Quality Perceptions Relative to Zones of Tolerance by Dimension Computer Manufacturer 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Reliability Responsiveness Assurance Empathy Tangibles Zone of Tolerance S.Q. Perception© A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the author’s permission 23
  • Service Quality Perceptions Relative to Zones of Tolerance by Dimension On-Line Services 9 8.4 8.3 8.4 8.3 8 7.0 7.0 7.5 7 7.0 6.8 6.8 6.8 6.7 6.7 6.8 6 5.7 5 4 3 2 1 0 Reliability Responsiveness Assurance Empathy Tangibles Zone of Tolerance S.Q. Perception© A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the author’s permission 24
  • Service Quality Perceptions Relative to Zones of Tolerance by Dimension Tech-Support Services 9 8.5 8.4 8.3 8 8.1 7 6.9 6.7 6.8 6.6 6.4 6 6.1 6.3 6.3 5 4 3 2 1 0 Reliability Responsiveness Assurance Empathy Zone of Tolerance S.Q. Perception© A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the author’s permission 25
  • LIBQUAL+: An Adaptation of SERVQUAL Source: http://www.arl.org/newsltr/212/libqual.jpg© A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the author’s permission 26
  • MULTIPLE METHODS OF LISTENING TO CUSTOMERS • Transactional surveys* • Mystery shopping • New, declining, and lost-customer surveys • Focus group interviews • Customer advisory panels • Service reviews • Customer complaint, comment, and inquiry capture • Total market surveys* • Employee field reporting • Employee surveys • Service operating data capture *A SERVQUAL-type instrument is most suitable for these methods© A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the author’s permission 27
  • The Role Of Technology In Service Delivery: Electronic Service Quality (e-SQ) and Technology Readiness (TR)© A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the author’s permission 28
  • Technology’s Growing Role in Marketing to and Serving Customers: Pyramid Model Company Internal External Marketing Marketing Technology Employees Customers Interactive Marketing© A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the author’s permission 29
  • Ongoing Research on e-Service Quality: Conceptual Framework and Preliminary Findings© A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the author’s permission 30
  • Research Phases and Questions PHASE 1: • What is good service on the Web? • What are the underlying dimensions of superior electronic service quality (e-SQ?) • How can e-SQ be conceptualized? PHASE 2: • How do these dimensions compare to those of traditional service quality? • How can e-SQ be measured and thereby assessed?© A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the author’s permission 31
  • Definition of e-Service Quality (e-SQ) e-SQ is the extent to which a Website facilitates efficient and effective shopping, purchasing and delivery of products and services.© A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the author’s permission 32
  • Dimensions of e-Service Quality from Focus Groups • Access • Responsiveness • Ease of Navigation • Assurance/Trust • Efficiency • Price Knowledge • Customization/ • Site Aesthetics Personalization • Reliability • Security/Privacy • Flexibility© A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the author’s permission 33
  • Reliability DEFINITION SAMPLE ATTRIBUTES • Site does not crash Correct technical • Accurate billing functioning of the • Accuracy of order site and the • Accuracy of account accuracy of service information promises, billing • Having items in and product stock information. • Truthful information • Merchandise arrives on time© A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the author’s permission 34
  • Efficiency DEFINITION SAMPLE ATTRIBUTES • Site is well organized The site is simple to use, • Site is simple to use structured properly, • Site provides and requires a minimum of information in information to be reasonable chunks input by the customer. • Site allows me to click for more information if I need it© A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the author’s permission 35
  • Means-End Model Concrete Perceptual Higher-level Cues Dimensions Attributes Abstractions SPECIFIC/ ABSTRACT CONCRETE© A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the author’s permission 36
  • Means-End Model of e-Service Quality Concrete Perceptual Higher-Level Cues Dimensions Attributes Abstractions Tab Structuring Easy to Maneuver through Site Site Map Easy to Find Ease of Search Engine What I Need Navigation Speed of One-click Ordering Checkout© A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the author’s permission 37
  • Concrete Perceptual Higher-Level Dimensions Cues Attributes Abstractions Access Ease of Navigation Efficiency Flexibility Reliability Perceived e-Service Personali- Quality zation Security/ Privacy Responsive- ness Assurance/ Trust Site Aesthetics Price Knowledge© A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the author’s permission 38
  • Means-End Model of e-Service Quality Behaviors Higher-Level Abstractions Purchase Dimensions Loyalty Perceived Convenience Perceptual W.O.M Attributes Perceived e-Service QualityConcrete Cues Perceived Perceived Control Value Perceived Price© A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the author’s permission 39
  • Conceptual Model for Understanding and Improving e-Service QualityCustomer Fulfillment Gap Customer Customer Perceived Perceived Purchase/ Web site Web site e-SQ Value Repurchase Requirements ExperiencesCompany Information Gap Design and Management’s Marketing Operation Beliefs of the of the about Customer Web site Web site Requirements Communication Design Gap Gap
  • e-Service Quality vs. Traditional SQ • Several dimensions are the same, but specific attributes underlying them are different • e-SQ involves some new dimensions • Empathy -- and other ‘hi-touch’ oriented attributes -- do not seem to be as critical for e-SQ except when customers experience problems; preliminary insights from Phase 2 suggest differences between regular and recovery e-SQ • Key drivers of regular e-SQ relate to efficiency, fulfillment, reliability, and privacy • Key drivers of recovery e-SQ relate to responsiveness, real-time access to help, and compensation© A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the author’s permission 41
  • An Important Implication of the Pyramid Model An organization’s ability to use technology effectively in marketing to and serving customers critically depends on the technology readiness of its customers and employees© A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the author’s permission 42
  • What is Technology Readiness [TR]? TR refers to “people’s propensity to embrace and use new technologies for accomplishing goals in home life and at work”© A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the author’s permission 43
  • Key Insights from Qualitative Research Studies • TR doesn’t just refer to possessing technical skills; TR is much more a function of people’s beliefs and feelings about technology • People’s beliefs can be positive about some aspects of technology but negative about other aspects • The relative strengths of the of positive and negative beliefs determine a person’s receptivity to technology© A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the author’s permission 44
  • Technology-Beliefs Continuum Resistant to Neutral Receptive to Technology Technology© A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the author’s permission 45
  • Link between Technology Beliefs and Technology Readiness High Technology Readiness Medium Low Resistant to Neutral Receptive to Technology Technology Technology-Beliefs Continuum© A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the author’s permission 46
  • Major Quantitative Research Studies• Three “National Technology Readiness Surveys” [NTRS] in the USA: – January 1999 – February 2000 – November 2001 – November 2002 [being planned]• Austrian Technology Readiness Surveys – February 2001 – October 2002 [being planned]• Swedish Technology Readiness Survey – July/August 2002 [data collected; analysis underway]
  • Key Insights from Quantitative Research Studies • TR consists of four facets or dimensions that are fairly independent of one another • People’s ratings on a set of belief statements about technology can be combined to create a reliable and valid measure of TR -- i.e., a “Technology Readiness Index” [TRI] • The TRI is a good predictor of people’s technology-related behaviors and preferences • A meaningful typology of customers can be created based on their TR scores on the four dimensions© A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the author’s permission 48
  • Drivers of Technology Readiness Contributors Optimism Innovativeness Technology Readiness Inhibitors Discomfort Insecurity© A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the author’s permission 49
  • Definitions of the TR Drivers • Optimism: Positive view of technology; belief that it offers increased control, flexibility and efficiency • Innovativeness: Tendency to be a technology pioneer and thought leader • Discomfort: Perceived lack of control over technology and a feeling of being overwhelmed by it • Insecurity: Distrust of technology and skepticism about its working properly© A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the author’s permission 50
  • TR Scores by Dimension and Overall TRI * 4,5 * 4 3,5 * 3 2,5Mean TR 2 Scores 1,5 1 0,5 0 1 2 3 4 5 OPT. INN. DIS. INS. TRI US 1999 US 2000 US 2001 Austria 2001 *Austrian and US scores are signifcantly different
  • Characteristics of Technology Segments Optimism Innovative- Dis- Insecu- ness comfort rityExplorers High High Low LowPioneers High High High HighSkeptics Low Low Low LowParanoids High Low High HighLaggards Low Low High High© A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the author’s permission 52
  • The Five TR Segments Differ on Technology Usage…..© A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the author’s permission 53
  • Greater than 50% Ownership/Usage of Technology-Based Products/Services (as of 1999) • Explorers: Computers, cell phones, caller ID, ATMs, online services, telephone banking • Pioneers: Computers, cell phones, caller ID, ATMs, online services • Skeptics: Computers, ATMs • Paranoids: ATMs • Laggards: None© A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the author’s permission 54
  • Pace of Technology Adoption Timing of 10% penetration rate for Internet access within each customer segment Skeptics Laggards Explorers Pioneers Paranoids 7/95 10/96 5/97 1/98 9/98© A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the author’s permission 55
  • New Customer Composition by Age of Techno- Based Product/Service First-time Users Laggards Paranoids Skeptics Pioneers Explorers rly te La Ea© A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the author’s permission 56
  • In Conclusion, to Deliver Superior Service in Library Environments: • Understand customers’ service expectations and how well those expectations are being met • Work systematically to remove organizational barriers that lead to poor customer service -- offline and online • Recognize and capitalize on the increasing role of technology in serving customers, but … • Be cognizant of customers’ and employees’ readiness to embrace technology-based services • Recognize that e-service quality as perceived by customers involves much more than having a state-of-the-art website • Put in place a solid behind-the-scenes infrastructure -- information systems, logistics, and human resources -- to deliver what a website’s façade promises. • Continuously monitor customers’ and employees’ reactions to and experiences with your electronic interfaces© A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the author’s permission 57
  • Sources of Information about TR and e-SQParasuraman and Colby, Techno-ReadyMarketing: How and Why Your CustomersAdopt Technology, New York: The FreePress, 2001.Parasuraman, “Technology Readiness Index (TRI): A Multiple-ItemScale to Measure Readiness to Embrace New Technologies,”Journal of Service Research, May 2000, pp. 307-320.•Zeithaml, Parasuraman, and Malhotra, “A Conceptual Frameworkfor Understanding e-Service Quality: Implications for FutureResearch and Managerial Practice,” MSI Monograph, 2000 (Report #00-115).
  • Thank You!© A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the author’s permission 59