Lit Revw Shah Sir

LITERATURE REVIEW
Literature review typically appears as introductions to reports of few primary data or as more
detailed independent work (Harper et.al., 1978).
Concept of Service
Service can be defined as "useful labor that does not produce a tangible commodity" in a
customer-oriented point of view (Davidoff, 1994). According to Philip Kotler, the term service
can be defined as “any activity or benefit that one party can offer to another that is essentially
intangible and does not result in the ownership of anything”.
Concept of Service Quality

Service quality has taken on huge importance in the service industry and has been a chief focal
point in academic research since it is viewed as a critical component of customer perceptions. In
the case of pure services, service quality will be a dominant element in customers’ evaluations.
Consumers judge the quality of services on their perceptions of the technical outcome provided
and on how that outcome was delivered.
Service quality is a concept that has aroused considerable interest and debate in the research
literature because of the difficulties in both defining it and measuring it with no overall consensus
emerging on either (Wisniewski, 2001). There are a number of different "definitions" as to what
is meant by service quality. One that is commonly used defines service quality as the extent to
which a service meets needs or expectations (Lewis and Mitchell, 1990; Dotchin and Oakland,
1994a; Asubonteng et al., 1996; Wisniewski and Donnelly, 1996). Service quality can thus be
defined as the difference between customer expectations of service and perceived service. 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).
Model of Service Quality Gaps

The model of service quality gaps was initially developed by Parasuraman et al. in 1985. The
model presented in Figure 1 is an extension of Parasuraman et al. (1985). There are seven major
gaps in the service quality concept, which are shown in Figure 1. Among seven major Gaps, Gap
1, Gap 5, and Gap 6 are much more important as they are more associated with the external
customers (ASI Quality Systems, 1992; Curry, 1999; Luk and Layton, 2002).
Gap1: Customers’ expectations versus management perceptions: as a result of the lack of a
marketing research orientation, inadequate upward communication and too many layers of
management.
Gap2: Management perceptions versus service specifications: as a result of inadequate
commitment to service quality, a perception of unfeasibility, inadequate task standardization
and an absence of goal setting.
Gap3: Service specifications versus service delivery: as a result of role ambiguity and conflict,
poor employee-job fit and poor technology-job fit, inappropriate supervisory control systems,
lack of perceived control and lack of teamwork.
Gap4: Service delivery versus external communication: as a result of inadequate horizontal
communications and propensity to over-promise.
Gap5: The discrepancy between customer expectations and their perceptions of the service
delivered: as a result of the influences exerted from the customer side and the shortfalls (gaps) on
the part of the service provider. In this case, customer expectations are influenced by the extent of
personal needs, word of mouth recommendation and past service experiences.
Gap6: 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.
Gap7: 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.
According to Brown and Bond (1995), "the gap model is one of the best received and most
heuristically valuable contributions to the services literature". The model identifies seven key
discrepancies or gaps relating to managerial perceptions of service quality, and tasks associated
with service delivery to customers. The six gaps (Gap 1, Gap 2, Gap 3, Gap 4, Gap 6 and Gap 7)
are identified as functions of the way in which service is delivered, whereas Gap 5 pertains to the
customer and as such is considered to be the true measure of service quality. The Gap on which
the SERVQUAL methodology has influenced is the Gap 5. Based on this gap (Gap 5), the
SERVQUAL approach was developed gradually.
Figure 1: Model of Service Quality Gaps
Word of mouth
Communications Personal needs Past experience
Expected service
Gap5
service
Consumer
Gap6 Perceived service
service
Service delivery Gap4serv External

ice
(including pre-and communications
post contacts) to customers
Provider
Gap3
Employee
service
perceptions
of consumer Translation of
expectation perceptions into
service quality
specifications
Gap1serv
ice Gap7 Gap2
service service
Management
perceptions of
Consumer
expectations
Source: Parasuraman et al., 1985; Curry, 1999; Luk and Layton, 2002.
Conceptual Model for Measuring Service Quality
Usually the service quality includes five dimensions following the SERVQUAL model:
• Reliability: The ability to perform the service accurately and dependably.

• Responsiveness: The willingness to help customers and provide a prompt service.
• Assurance: The knowledge and courtesy of the employees and their ability to inspire
trust and confidence.
• Empathy: BFTI provides care and individualized attention to its customers.
• Tangibles: The appearance of physical facilities, personnel and information material.
SERVQUAL Model in Banking Sector

SERVQUAL Model was used in several studies to measure IT service quality (KIM 1990: Pitt,
Watson and Kavan 1995; Shaw, Delone and Niedman 2002). These studies have confirmed that
SERVQUAL can be used with confidence in banking environment.
OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
Broad Objective
The broad objective of this study is to analyse the expectations and perceptions of the end-user
about the service provided by various banks operating in Bangladesh.
Specific objectives
Specific objectives of this study are -
• To measure the end-users’ expectations regarding the ATM services.
• To measure the end-users’ (diagnostic centres) perceptions regarding the ATM services.
• To analyse the gap between end-users’ expectations and perceptions of ATM services
quality.
• To measure the relationship between the end-users’ satisfaction and various service
quality dimensions.

Lit Revw Shah Sir

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Lit Revw Shah Sir

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Lit Revw Shah Sir

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

LITERATURE REVIEW

Concept of Service Quality

Model of Service Quality Gaps

Service delivery Gap4serv External

• Reliability: The ability to perform the service accurately and dependably.

SERVQUAL Model in Banking Sector

OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

You might also like