Servqual model presentation by Deepraj Naiko & Zouleikha Toorawa
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Servqual model presentation by Deepraj Naiko & Zouleikha Toorawa






Total Views
Views on SlideShare
Embed Views



3 Embeds 1,553 1510 41 2



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.

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Servqual model presentation by Deepraj Naiko & Zouleikha Toorawa Servqual model presentation by Deepraj Naiko & Zouleikha Toorawa Presentation Transcript

  • THE SERVQUAL MODELByZouleikha Toorawa& Deepraj Naiko
  • OVERVIEW Topic(s) Slide(s)I. Introduction 03II. SERVQUAL as a Measuring Tool 04III. Basis of the SERVQUAL Model 05IV. The SERVQUAL Gaps 06V. Causes for the Gaps 12VI. Solutions to the Gaps 17VII. The Key Service Dimensions 18VIII. Conceptual Model of Service Quality 24IX. Criticisms to SERVQUAL 25X. SERVQUAL; Good or Bad??? 26XI. Advantages of SERVQUAL 27XII. Disadvantages of SERVQUAL 28XIII. Methodology for SERVQUAL 29XIV. Uses of SERVQUAL 30XV. Applications of SERVQUAL 31XVI. Conclusions 32XVII. The End 33XVIII. List of References 34 2XIX. Appendix 36XX. CD-ROM of Presentation (Soft Copy) 38
  • INTRODUCTION Service quality is an approach to manage business processes in order to ensure full satisfaction of the customers & quality in service provided. It works as an antecedent of customer satisfaction (Ruyter and Bloemer, 1995) If expectations are greater than performance, then perceived quality is less than satisfactory and hence customer dissatisfaction occurs (Parasuraman et al ., 1985; Lewis and Mitchell, 1990) SERVQUAL is a service quality framework, developed in the eighties by Zeithaml, Parasuraman & Berry, aiming at measuring the scale of Quality in the service sectors. SERVQUAL was originally measured on 10 aspects of service quality: reliability, responsiveness, competence, access, courtesy, communication, credibility, security, understanding the customer, and tangibles, to measure the gap between customer expectations and experience. 3 Wikipedia [Online] Available at: <> [Accessed 20 October 2012]
  • SERVQUAL AS A MEASURING TOOL In 1988 the 10 components were collapsed into five dimensions (RATER). Reliability, tangibles and responsiveness remained distinct, but the remaining seven components collapsed into two aggregate dimensions, assurance and empathy. Parasuraman et al. developed a 22-scale instrument with which to measure customers’ expectations and perceptions (E and P) of the five RATER dimensions. Four or five numbered items are used to measure each dimension. The instrument is administered twice in different forms, first to measure expectations and second to measure perceptions. Dimensions Scale Reliability 4 Assurance 5 Tangibles 4 Empathy 5 4 Responsiveness 4Francis Buttle, 1996, "SERVQUAL: review, critique, research agenda," European Journal of Marketing, Vol.30, Issue 1,
  • BASIS OF THE SERVQUAL MODEL The SERVQUAL model is dependent on three major bases 1) The 5 Gaps: There are 5 Gaps that create a void between the customer’s expectations and the service delivered by the service provider. Organizations should measure, manage and minimise these 5 Gaps for successfully marketing their service. 2) Causes & Solutions to Gaps: Identifying the causes and appropriate solutions are very crucial to minimize that void. 3) The Key Service Dimensions: The aspects that should be stressed upon so as to allow the service to be adopted by targeted segments 5 Arlt-lectures. [Online] Available at <> [Accessed on 22 October 2012]
  • THE SERVQUAL GAPS Gap 1 Commonly known as the management perception gap Gap 1 results from a difference between what customers expect and what management perceives these expectations to be. It indicates a problem with the understanding of the market. This can occur, as a result of insufficient research or communication failures. E.g. : Management of ABC Dry cleaning Ltd perceives that a particular segment simply expects low prices on its service, when in fact, the expectation is a value-for-money service. M a na ge m e nt E x p e cte d P e rc e p tio n s S e rv ice o f C u sto m e r E x p e c ta tio n s 6 Arlt-lectures. [Online] Available at <> [Accessed on 22 October 2012]
  • THE SERVQUAL GAPS Gap 2 Commonly known as quality specification gap. Gap 2 results from a difference between management perceptions of what customers expect and the specifications that management draws up when detailing the service quality delivery actions that are required. Service design and performance standards are pre-requisites for bridging this gap. E.g. : Most hotels do not do housekeeping in a room on the day the customer is checking out. But has management realised that the customer who is doing a late checking out wants a clean room during that day? S e rvic e M an ag em en t Q u a lity P e rc e p tio n s S p e c ific a tio n s o f C u s to m e r E xp e c ta tio n s 7 Wikipedia [Online] Available at: <> [Accessed 20 October 2012]
  • THE SERVQUAL GAPS Gap 3 S ervic e S ervic e D elivery Q u ality Commonly known as the Service delivery gap. S p ec ific ation s Gap 3 results from a mismatch between the service delivery specifications required by management and the actual service that is delivered by front line staff. It is the difference between customer-driven service design & standards, and the service delivery of the provider. Managers need to audit the customer experience that their organization currently delivers in order to make sure it lives up to the expected level. E.g. : Usually, all restaurants need to attend to every request and orders of the customers. But very often when customers place orders, they either do not receive the orders at all or the waiter has confused it with that of another customer. 8 Wikipedia [Online] Available at: <> [Accessed 20 October 2012]
  • THE SERVQUAL GAPS Gap 4 Commonly known as market communication gap. This is the gap between the delivery of the customer experience and what is communicated to customers, i.e. the discrepancy between actual service and the promised one All too often organizations exaggerate what will be provided to customers, or discuss the best case rather than the likely case, raising customer expectations and harming customer perceptions. E.g. A company commercialising slimming products boasts that customers may lose up to 4-5 kgs/week. But they do not specify that a strict diet and regular exercise must accompany the treatment for it to have the desired effect. S e rv ice E x te rn a l D e liv e ry C o m m u n ica tio n s 9 to C u sto m e rs Wikipedia [Online] Available at: <> [Accessed 20 October 2012]
  • THE SERVQUAL GAPS Gap 5 Commonly known as the perceived service quality gap. Gap 5 may be identified as the overall difference between the expected service and the perceived service experienced. Gap 5 results from the combination of Gaps 1 to 4 Customers expectations have been shaped by word of mouth, their personal needs and their own past service experiences. Unless Gap 5 is kept under check, it may result in lost customers, bad reputation, negative corporate image. E xp e c te d P e rc e ive d S e rvic e S e rvic e 10 Arlt-lectures. [Online] Available at <> [Accessed on 22 October 2012]
  • THE SERVQUAL GAPS 2 ADDITIONAL GAPS Gap 6: The discrepancy between customer expectations and employees’ perceptions: as a result of the differences in the understanding of customer expectations by front-line service providers. Gap 7: The discrepancy between employee’s perceptions and management perceptions: as a result of the differences in the understanding of customer expectations between managers and service providers. 11 Shahin, A. (2010), “SERVQUAL and Model of Service Quality Gaps: A Framework for Determining and Prioritizing Critical Factors in Delivering Quality Services”, Online artilcle.
  • CAUSES FOR THE GAPS GAP 1 - not knowing what customers expect E.g. : XYZ Events Ltd organised a wedding with the usual white and blue decorations, when the customer had expected something new and original. Causes:  Lack of a marketing orientation to quality  Poorly interpreted information about customer’s expectations  Research not focused on demand quality  Too many layers between the front line personnel & top level management 12 Arlt-lectures. [Online] Available at <> [Accessed on 22 October 2012]
  • CAUSES FOR THE GAPS GAP 2 - The wrong service quality standards E.g. : XYZ Events Ltd perceived that the customer wanted a very nice reception with at least 2 waiters at each table, but management eventually decided otherwise to reduce costs. Causes:  inadequate commitment to service quality  lack of perception of feasibility  inadequate task standardization  the absence of goal setting  Insufficient planning of procedures 13 Arlt-lectures. [Online] Available at <> [Accessed on 22 October 2012]
  • CAUSES FOR THE GAPS GAP 3 - The service performance gap E.g. : XYZ Events Ltd had promised the most exquisite catering and wedding cake, but the food was not appreciable and the bride didn’t like the cake at all. Causes:  Poor employee or technology fit - the wrong person or wrong system for the job  Deficiencies in human resource policies such as ineffective recruitment, role ambiguity, role conflict  Failure to match demand and supply  Too much or too little control 14  Lack of teamwork within the organisation Arlt-lectures. [Online] Available at <> [Accessed on 22 October 2012]
  • CAUSES FOR THE GAPS GAP 4 - When promises do not match actual delivery E.g : XYZ Events Ltd promised to have a Mercedes limousine for the entry of the groom, but eventually the latter was given a simple Nissan Sunny.  Causes:  inadequate horizontal communication  Over-promising in external communication campaign  Failure to manage customer expectations  Failure to perform according to specifications given to customers 15 Arlt-lectures. [Online] Available at <> [Accessed on 22 October 2012]
  • CAUSES FOR THE GAPS GAP 5 - The difference between customer perception of service and the expectation they had. Usually the cause is the occurrence of the 4 other Gaps, which results in a difference between customer perception and the expectation they had. Ultimately the groom’s experience was way too far from what he had expected, and thus results in dissatisfaction. Other causes can be:  cultural background,  family lifestyle,  personality,  demographics,  advertising,  experience with similar service  information available online.  Customer perception is totally subjective and is based 16 on the customer’s interaction with the service. Brainmates. [Online] Available at < > [Accessed on 23 October 2012]
  • SOLUTIONS TO THE GAPSNo Solutions as such, but rather, measures that can be taken to minimize the gaps Gap Definitions Measures 1 Customers’ expectations Use of good Customer Relationship Management Techniques to profile & versus management know customer’s expectations, tastes and needs perceptions E.g: XYZ Events Ltd should conduct sample surveys to know what customers expect nowadays 2 Management perceptions Managers need to make sure the organization is defining the level of versus service service they believe is needed. specifications E.g.: XYZ Events Ltd could have offered pre-set wedding packages at different prices with different services set. 3 Service specifications Managers need to audit the customer experience that their organization versus service delivery currently delivers in order to make sure it lives up to the expected level. E,g.: XYZ Events Ltd needs to ask customers to give their post experience feedbacks 4 Service delivery versus Use of good Communication skills and avoid ambiguous or fraudulent external communication: terms to confuse or mislead the customer. E.g.: XYZ Events Ltd should clearly inform the customer about something that will not be possible to implement 5 The discrepancy between Application of all the above measures to make sure the service delivered customer expectations meets the expectations of the customer and their perceptions of 17 17 the service delivered
  • THE KEY SERVICE DIMENSIONS The five SERVQUAL dimensions are: R-A-T-E-R: 1) RESPONSIVENESS - Willingness to help customers and provide prompt service 2) ASSURANCE - Knowledge and courtesy of employees and their ability to convey trust and confidence 3) TANGIBLES - Appearance of physical facilities, equipment, personnel, and communication materials 4) EMPATHY - Caring, individualized attention the firm provides its customers 5) RELIABILITY - Ability to perform the promised service dependably and accurately 18 Arlt-lectures. [Online] Available at <> [Accessed on 22 October 2012]
  • RESPONSIVENESS Responsiveness means to respond quickly, promptly, rapidly, immediately, or instantly. Even if customers are chronically slow in getting back to providers, responsiveness is very crucial in their service quality assessment. Whether its 30 minutes, 4 hours, or 24 hours, its important that customers feel providers are promptly responsive to their requests at anytime. Not only for emergencies, but even for everyday responses as well. E.g. : A member of the public calls at Chantefrais to complain that a particular Chantefrais outlet is not respecting its opening hours. The quality officer, to whom all complaints are addressed, has to make immediate inquiries & revert back to the plaintiff to reassure him that necessary actions have been taken. 19 Wikipedia [Online] Available at: <> [Accessed 20 October 2012]
  • ASSURANCE Assurance is a combination of the following:  Competence - having the requisite skills and knowledge  Courtesy - politeness, respect, consideration and friendliness of contact staff  Credibility - trustworthiness, believability and honesty of staff  Security - freedom from danger, risk or doubt, to feel in good hands E.g. : Management of Chantefrais ensures that all staff is empowered enough to address complaints and requests. Following to some rumours sometime back, customers began asking whether there will be an increase in price of products. Any staff were competent enough to handle this question and was ready to give explanations and details if asked. Arlt-lectures. [Online] Available at <> [Accessed on 22 October 20 2012]
  • TANGIBLES Tangibles deals with all that is physically visible and touchable. Even though this is the least important dimension, appearance matters. Service providers will still want to make certain their employees appearance, uniforms, equipment, and work areas on-site (closets, service offices, etc.) look good. The danger is for providers who can make everything look sharp, and then fall short on RELIABILITY or RESPONSIVENESS. E.g. : Chantefrais, stresses on ethics about dress code. Uniforms are provided and no eccentricities are allowed such as flashy colours, or outrageously sexy dresses for the ladies. 21 Wikipedia [Online] Available at: <> [Accessed 20 October 2012]
  • EMPATHY Empathy is the capacity to recognize feelings that are being experienced by another person. Someone may need to have a certain amount of empathy before they are able to feel compassion. Empathy is a combination of the following:  Communication - keeping customers informed in a language they understand and really listening to them.  Understanding the customer - making the effort to get to know customers and their specific needs while trying to “wear their shoes”  E.g. : The way of living, the background, & the level of education, have to be taken into consideration while dealing with Chantefrais’s customers (franchisees). The language used and the way the franchisee in D’Epinay is addressed is not the same as the one in Floreal is dealt with. 22 Arlt-lectures. [Online] Available at <> [Accessed on 22 October 2012]
  • RELIABILITY “Do what you say youre going to do when you said you were going to do it.” because Customers want to count on their providers. It is three times more important to be reliable than have shiny new equipment or flashy uniforms. Doesnt mean you can have ragged uniforms and only be reliable. Service providers have to do both. But providers’ first and best efforts are better spent making service reliable. E.g. : Some time back, Chantefrais management had promised the launching of a new product by a certain deadline, but for some technical reasons, was not able to do so before I year. This resulted in a lost of trust and reliability because the customers (franchisees) kept on asking about the new product and front liners were unable to give satisfactory explanations. Chantefrais now never makes promises before being sure to be able to fulfil them. 23 Wikipedia [Online] Available at: <> [Accessed 20 October 2012]
  • CONCEPTUAL MODEL OF SERVICE QUALITY GAP 1: Not knowing what customers expect GAP 2: wrong service quality standards GAP 3: The service performance gap GAP 4: promises do not match actual delivery GAP 5: The difference between customer perception and expectation 24 The Integrated Gaps Model of Service Quality (Parasuraman, Zeithaml, Berry 1985)
  • CRITICISMS TO SERVQUAL o It has been criticized that SERVQUALs 5 dimensions (RATER) are not universals, and that the model fails to draw on established economic, statistical and psychological theory. o There is little evidence that customers assess service quality in terms of Perception / Expectation gaps. o SERVQUAL focuses on the process of service delivery, not the outcomes of the service encounter. o There is a high degree of intercorrelation between the five RATER dimensions, thus the scores obtained cannot be exact. 25Francis Buttle, 1996, "SERVQUAL: review, critique, research agenda," European Journal of Marketing, Vol.30, Issue 1,
  • SERVQUAL; GOOD OR BAD??? SERVQUAL “remains the most complete attempt to conceptualize and measure service quality” – Nyeck, et al. (2002) The main benefit to the SERVQUAL measuring tool is the ability of researchers to examine numerous service industries such as healthcare, banking, financial services, and education Nyeck et al. (2002) reviewed 40 articles that made use of the SERVQUAL measuring tool and discovered “that few researchers concerned themselves with the validation of the measuring tool”, which means it is well anchored as a trusted model. SQ is widely regarded as a driver of corporate marketing and financial performance Wikipedia [Online] Available at: <> [Accessed 20 October 26 2012]
  • ADVANTAGES OF SERVQUAL Enables assessing service quality from the customer’s perspective We can track customer expectations and perceptions over time, together with the discrepancies between them Servqual enables comparison to competitors on common aspects We can assess the expectations and perceptions of internal customers – e.g. other departments or services we deal with. 27 Arlt-lectures. [Online] Available at <> [Accessed on 22 October 2012]
  • DISADVANTAGES OF SERVQUAL  The uniform applicability of the method for all service sectors is difficult.  The use of expectations in measuring service quality has currently come under a lot of criticism.  Does not measure service outcome perceptions. 28 Scribd [Online] Available at [Accessed on 20 October 2012
  • METHODOLOGY OF SERVQUAL The method essentially involves conducting a sample survey of customers so that their perceived service needs are understood. For measuring their perceptions of service quality for the organization in question, customers are asked to answer numerous questions within each dimension that determines:  The relative importance of each attribute.  A measurement of performance expectations that would relate to an “excellent” company.  A measurement of performance for the company in question. This provides an assessment of the gap between desired and actual performance. This allows an organization to focus its resources where necessary and to maximize service quality whilst costs are controlled 29 Scribd [Online] Available at <> [Accessed on 20 October 2012
  • USES OF SERVQUAL To assess a companys service quality along each of the 5 SERVQAL dimensions. E.g. XYZ Events Ltd carries out the servqual survey to know where it stands in the perception of customers. To track customers expectations and perceptions over time. E.g. XYZ Events Ltd wants to compare its score of last year against that of the current year to know whether it has improved or has to improve To compare a companys SERVQUAL scores against competitors. E.g.: XYZ Events Ltd wants to compare its score against that of 1570 Events Ltd to see who is the best. To identify and examine customer segments that differ significantly in their assessment of a companys service performance. To assess internal service quality (interdepartmental comparison)Wikipedia [Online] Available at: <> [Accessed 20 October 2012] 30
  • APPLICATIONS OF SERVQUAL Service quality has become an important research topic because of its apparent relationship to costs, profitability, customer satisfaction, and customer retention SERVQUAL has been a keyword in 41 publications which incorporate both theoretical discussions and applications of SERVQUAL in a variety of industrial, commercial and not-for-profit settings. Some of the published studies include :  hotels (Saleh and Ryan, 1992)  travel and tourism (Fick and Ritchie, 1991),  car servicing (Bouman and van der Wiele, 1992),  business schools (Rigotti and Pitt, 1992),  accounting firms (Freeman and Dart, 1993),  architectural services (Baker and Lamb, 1993),  airline catering (Babakus et al., 1993),  Mobile Telecommunications in Macedonia, (Zekiri et al., 2011) 31Francis Buttle, 1996, "SERVQUAL: review, critique, research agenda," European Journal of Marketing, Vol.30, Issue 1,
  • CONCLUSIONS SERVQUAL is considered very complex, subjective and statistically unreliable. The simplified RATER model however is a simple and useful model for qualitatively exploring and assessing customers service experiences It is an efficient model in helping an organization shape up their efforts in bridging the gap between perceived and expected service SERVQUAL is used to track customers expectations and perceptions over time to compare the companys SERVQUAL scores against competitors. Although SERVQUALs face and construct validity are in doubt, it is widely used in modified forms (RATER) to measure customer expectations and perceptions of service quality. 32
  • THE END THANK YOU SERVICE MARKETING 33© Toorawa Z., Naiko D., (2012), “The Servqual Model”
  • LIST OF REFERENCES Arlt-lectures. [Online] Available at <> [Accessed on 22 October 2012] Brainmates. [Online] Available at < service-gap-model > [Accessed on 23 October 2012] Francis Buttle, 1996, "SERVQUAL: review, critique, research agenda," European Journal of Marketing, Vol.30, Issue 1, Luis Filipe Lages & Joana Cosme Fernandes, 2005, "The SERPVAL scale: A multi-item instrument for measuring service personal values", Journal of Business Research Nyeck, S., Morales, M., Ladhari, R., & Pons, F. (2002). "10 years of service quality measurement: reviewing the use of the SERVQUAL instrument." Retrieved October 2012, from EBSCOhost database. Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V.A. and Berry, L.L. (1986), "SERVQUAL: a multiple-item scale formeasuring customer perceptions of service quality" 34 Scribd [Online] Available at <> [Accessed on 20 October 2012
  • LIST OF REFERENCES Shahin, A. (2010), “SERVQUAL and Model of Service Quality Gaps: A Framework for Determining and Prioritizing Critical Factors in Delivering Quality Services”, Online artilcle. Van Iwaarden, J., van der Wiele, T., Ball, L., and Millen, R. (2003), "Applying SERVQUAL to web sites: An exploratory study", International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management Wikipedia [Online] Available at : < Q/ What_is_the _servqual model> [Accessed 20 October 2012] Wikipedia [Online] Available at: <> [Accessed 20 October 2012] Zeithaml, Parasuraman & Berry, "Delivering Quality Service; Balancing Customer Perceptions and Expectations," Free Press, 1990 Zeithaml,V. A., Berry, L. L. and Parasuraman, A. (1996). The behavioral consequences of Service quality. Journal of Marketing Zekiri, J. (2011), “Applying SERVQUAL Model and Factor Analysis in Assessing Customer Satisfaction with Service Quality: The Case of Mobile Telecommunications in Macedonia”, 35 Eurojournals
  • APPENDIXServqual Questionnaire for a Study on PCBs (Private Commercial Banks) in Bangladesh 36
  • APPENDIX 37 Business Management Dynamics Vol.1, No.1, July 2011, pp.01-11