study of service quality in a b-school with servqual model · study of service quality in a...

Study of Service quality in a B-School with SERVQUAL Model

Study of Service quality in a B-school with SERVQUAL Model

-Mohammed Rashid

ABSTRACT Customer satisfaction and service quality are often treated together as functions of customer’s

perceptions and expectations. Research has shown that high service quality contributes significantly to

customer satisfaction and customer delight. This study empirically explores the relationship between

Institution’s Quality management and Service quality performance for a sample of Students of a B-

School in Noida. SERVQUAL model has been adopted to capture various aspects of service quality. The

Study has been undertaken to demonstrate the Gaps for measuring Students’ Perception-Expectation of

Academic quality in a B-school.

The purpose of the research is to provide review of the SERVQUAL research in measurement of a B-

school service quality. To measure the Students Expectations before joining the college and their

Experience/Perception after spending time in college.

Keywords:

Service, Gaps, SERVQUAL, Perceptions, Expectations

INTRODUCTION The growth of B-school in India has been phenomenal in the last decade. Many new B-schools started

their operations to serve students and provide them quality education. This unprecedented growth

(more than 2000 B-schools) has raised concern about the quality of B-school. The last decade has seen

many changes in the way B-schools and Private institutes as a whole deal with the student’s expectation

with regards to the quality of services the educational institute provides- this is especially evident in the

B-school domain. Furthermore when a student takes an admission in a college he has some expectation

from the college. It is College’s duty to meet students’ expectation with optimum service in terms of

both academic and administrative. Various challenges faced by institutions are, dearth of quality faculty,

Infrastructure, research and development, quality of students, admission process etc. Measuring quality

of an educational service is important to achieve higher involvement of students and improve their

overall performance.


LITERATURE REVIEW Quality is difficult to implement and capture in a meaningful sense. Given the force that place intense,

sometimes conflicting pressures on the providers of MBA/PGDM degree program, it becomes

incumbent upon us to reflect on what quality means in today’s world. (Rapert et al, 2004)

There are increasing demands for quality in education institutions, and many Institutes have realized

that quality is central to differentiating themselves from other institutions and gain a competitive edge.

The experience of other industries has shown us that the key to long term growth, profit, brand value

and success may be embedded in the philosophy of “quality first” and the effective management of

quality within an organization.

Unlike a manufacturing product, where quality can readily be assessed, service quality is an elusive and

abstract concept that is difficult to define and measure and more so in education domain. Service in

educational institutes is intangible because quality assessments of a service are not one-dimensional.

The nature of service performance diverges from one transaction to another. This “heterogeneity” can

occur because the service experienced by student depends deeply with the students’ expectation from

the institutions.

The ultimate goal service quality measurement is to assist management in ensuring service quality and

students satisfaction. If service quality is to become the cornerstone of marketing and branding strategy

of the Institution the institute must have a mean to measure it. Measurement is necessary step towards

devising any action plan. So as to identify the bottle necks in the service delivery and try to overcome it.

SERVQUAL is one method which can be used to identify the Expectation-Perception Gap in service

delivery of an institution.

SERVQUAL- The Yardstick

SERVQUAL was developed in 1985 by the marketing research team of Berry, Parasuraman and Ziethaml

and is one of the most widely used instruments to measure service quality (Brown et al., 1996, in Buttle,

1996). SERVQUAL measures the gap between customer’s expectations for excellence and their

perceptions of actual service delivered. The development of SERVQUAL was a significant contribution

made towards the development of a quantitative yardstick for assessing the quality of a firm's service by

measuring customers' perceptions of quality. The resulting multiple-item scale for measuring service

quality, SERVQUAL, lists five dimensions or determinants of service quality: tangibles, reliability,

responsiveness, assurance and empathy (Parasuraman et al 1985).

SERVQUAL provides a means of measurement for researchers to determine how well service level is

delivered and how it matches customer expectations on a consistent basis. SERVQUAL provides a

technology for measuring and managing service quality (SQ). Since 1985, when the technology was first

published, its innovators Parasuraman, Zeithaml and Berry, have further developed, promulgated and

promoted the technology through a series of publications (Parasuraman et al., 1985; 1986; 1988; 1990;

1991a; 1991b; 1993; 1994; Zeithaml et al., 1990; 1991; 1992; 1993).Parasuraman, Zeithaml, and Berry


continued their pioneering work in service quality through the introduction of the SERVQUAL instrument

in 1988 as a questionnaire to measure consumer perception of service quality. In 1988 work,

Parasuraman collapsed components of service quality into five dimensions: reliability, assurance,

tangibles, empathy and responsiveness.

Parasuraman et al. developed a 22-item 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.

Analysis of SERVQUAL data can take several forms: item-by-item analysis (e.g. P1 - E1, P2 - E2);

dimension-by-dimension analysis (e.g. (P1 + P2 + P3 + P4/4) - (E1 + E2 + E3 + E4/4), where P1 to P4, and

E1 to E4, represent the four perception and expectation statements relating to a single dimension); and

computation of the single measure of service quality ((P1 + P2 + P3 ... + P22/22) - (E1 + E2 + E3 + … +

E22/22)), the so-called SERVQUAL gap.

A very short and somewhat rude definition is that it is a methodology to measure the gap between

customers' expectations and their perceptions or experiences with aspects of a given service. A

SERVQUAL study will normally investigate the relationship between users' perception of the quality of a

service and their experience of the quality of the given service. The method essentially involves

conducting sample survey of customers so that their perceived service needs are understood.

The SERVQUAL model used in various service industries is employed to understand and find the

Expectation-Perception Gap of service delivery by the B-school

For measuring their perception of service quality of the B-school in question, students’ were 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” Institute.

A measurement of performance for the institute in question.


METHODOLOGY

The present study by providing the Perception-Expectation Gap score will help the B-school in

identifying the deficiencies and excess in quality as regards to various dimensions of quality.

Study Objectives:

To critically examine the quality parameters of services provided by the B-school

To find out the most responsive factor affecting the Perception of students regarding the service

components in the B-school

To find out as to how much these parameters rate are as per the expectations of the Students

Sample:

The present study was carried out in December 2015 in a B-school in Noida. The Institution is operating

since a decade now. A total of 50 students were surveyed. Random sampling was employed to carry out

the survey.

Instrument Used:

This study used the SERVQUAL scale questionnaire designed by Parasuraman et al. (1988) to measure

the expected and perceived quality of services provided by a B-school in Noida. The questionnaire

utilized to gather the data comprised of four main parts.

Part I respondents were required to indicate the importance of each of the five dimensions of service

quality, that is tangibles, reliability, responsiveness, assurance and empathy, by allocating a total of 100

points to these dimensions as well as to rank their importance.

Part II dealt with the socio-demographic characteristics of the respondents.

Part III consisted of 22 items to measures students' expectations of college’s services in general

Part IV consisted of a corresponding 22-item scale to measure the student' perceptions of the services

actually offered by the hospital under study.

The scores for each item ranged from "1" for strongly disagree" to "7" for "strongly agree" on a seven-

point Likert scale.


Data Analysis Approach This study follows closely the steps taken to measure the unweighted average SERVQUAL scores and the weighted average SERVQUAL scored by two other studies (Kaura 1993; Ow 1994). In computing the unweighted average SERVQUAL scores and the weighted average SERVQUAL scores, the 22 items of SERVQUAL (as listed in the Annexure II) in both the expectations and perception statements have been grouped according to the five basic dimensions of tangibles (items 1 to 4), reliability (items 5 to 9), responsiveness (items 10 to 13), assurance (items 14 to 17) and empathy (items 18 to 22). To measure the unweighted average SERVQUAL scores and the weighted average SERVQUAL scores, several steps were taken.


SERVQUAL SCORES Dimension Stateme

nt

Expectatio

n Score

Perception/E

xperience

Score

Gap Score Average

for

Dimension

Tangibles 1 260 226 -34 -0.68

2 273 238 -35 -0.7

3 277 249 -28 -0.56

4 253 237 -16 -0.32

Reliability 5 271 234 -37 -0.74

6 263 218 -45 -0.9

7 261 214 -47 -0.94

8 265 234 -31 -0.62

9 270 236 -34 -0.68

Responsivene

ss 10 269 233 -36 -0.72

11 265 232 -33 -0.66

12 276 222 -54 -1.08

13 264 240 -24 -0.48

Assurance 14 287 258 -29 -0.58

15 274 244 -30 -0.6

16 272 240 -32 -0.64

17 280 225 -55 -1.1

Empathy 18 264 232 -32 -0.64

19 264 240 -24 -0.48

20 260 230 -30 -0.6

21 263 230 -33 -0.66

22 283 225 -58 -1.16

Unweighted Average SERVQUAL score:

-0.706

Table 1: Unweighted SERVQUAL Scores

The above table shows the sum of expectation scores for each question, the sum of Perception score,

the Gap score and the average for the dimension for the sample of 50 students.

The Unweighted Average SERVQUAL score is -0.706. This score is in negative zone meaning thereby that

the students’ expectations are more than their experience. They perceived the services provided to

them as a poor quality.


Dimension Average Gap Score

Average Importance Point

Average weighted Dimension

Tangibles -2.26 23.59 -0.53313

Reliability -3.88 20.56 -0.79773

Responsiveness -2.94 19.34 -0.5686

Assurance -2.92 19.36 -0.56531

Empathy -3.54 17.15 -0.60711

Weighted Average SERVQUAL score: -3.07188

Table 2: Weighted SERVQUAL Scores

The above table exhibits the Weighted SERVQUAL scores.

When importance weights were also taken into consideration the resultant weighted SERVQUAL

Score (-3.0718) was also negative.

The average Importance point for the 5 factors; Tangibility (23.59) was allocated maximum weight

followed by Reliability (20.56) which is then closely followed by Assurance (19.36) and Responsiveness

(19.34). Empathy ranked last with 17.15. The score of -3.071 for weighted average SERVQUAL score is an

alarm sign for the Institute.


Figure 1: Unweighted SERVQUAL Score

Figure 2: Weighted SERVQUAL Score

The above figure illustrates the weighted SERVQUAL Scores for the 5 dimensions namely; Tangibility,

Responsiveness, Reliability, Assurance and Empathy.

The figure shows the Unweighted

SERVQUAL scores for the sample of

50 students.

The negative score for Reliability is

highest followed by Responsiveness,

Assurance, Empathy and Tangibility.

Further analysis on Reliability can be

done to understand the reason for

such a high negative score.

The Figure exhibits the

weighted SERVQUAL Scores for

the 5 dimensions. Weighted

Reliability scored the highest

negative. This is an alarming

sign as students perceive

college as unreliable.


Figure 3: SERVQUAL Score: Gender

Figure 4: SERVQUAL Score: 1st year V 2nd year

The Figure exhibits the

SERVQUAL score for

Male vs Female. It is

quite evident from fig.

that Female perceives

college as more

unreliable compared to

Male counterpart. In

addition to this there is a

huge difference in the

Responsiveness score

between Male and

female.

Figure illustrates the

SERVQUAL Score for 2nd

year students is

comparably higher than

the 1st year student. This

is probably because

they’ve spend more time

in college and hence the

higher negative score is

quite justifiable as more

time spent will lead to

more dissatisfaction.


CONCLUSION The findings of this study have important practical implications to the management of quality of

education institutions. This study demonstrates the usefulness of the SERVQUAL approach as a measure

of service quality. SERVQUAL can highlight area for specific action and address perceived service

shortcomings. Consequently, systematic students’ feedback so that steps can be taken by the institute

to be more reliable to students. The results of this study can further be explored to understand the

underlying reasons for such large Gap between the students’ expectation and their perception.

The SERVQUAL is an important study as it provides the students perspective of the level of service

quality. Such a study will help the college/service provider to anticipate students’ requirement rather

than reacting to students’ dissatisfaction. One such way for management is to look for improving on

aspects such as improving Physical facilities, training staff and communicating precise information on all

activities.


Bibliography Berry, L. (1980). Service Marketing is Different. Business Week , pp. 24-29.

J, B. (1990). Creating a service culture. Canidian Banker.

Johnston, R. (2008). Service Operations Management. PEARSON.

Markanday, D. (n.d.). Study of Service quality in GOVT/NGO's Eys Hospital in Haryana with SERVQUAL

Model: An Empirical Study.

Parasuraman, A., Zeithamal, V. A., & Berry, L. (1991). Refinement and reassessment of SERVQUAL Scale.

Journal of retailing , 420-449.


Annexure-1

Table 1 - Calculation of SERVQUAL Scores

SERVQUAL Dimension

Score from Table 1 Weighting from Table 2 Weighted Score

Tangibility

Reliability

Responsiveness

Assurance

Empathy

Average Weighted score:

Table 2 - Calculation of Weighted SERVQUAL Scores

Dimension Statement Expectation Score

Perception Score

Gap Score

Average for Dimension

Tangibles 1

2

3

4

Reliability 5

6

7

8

9

Responsiveness 10

11

12

13

Assurance 14

15

16

17

Empathy 18

19

20

21

22

Unweighted Average SERVQUAL score:


Features Points

The appearance of the Colleges physical facilities, equipment, personnel and communication materials.

The College's ability to perform the promised service dependably and accurately

The Colleges willingness to help Students and provide prompt service.

The knowledge and courtesy of the College's employees and their ability to convey trust and confidence.

The caring individual attention the College provides its Students.

Total: 100

Table 3 - SERVQUAL Importance Weights


The SERVQUAL Questionnaire

Thank you for agreeing to take part in this important survey. This survey should take 4-5 minutes to complete. The survey is for academic purpose and the responses will be kept confidential. There are no 'right' or 'wrong' answers to any questions The Survey The questionnaire below is in two sections. The first section asks you to rank all

Colleges according to your expectations i.e. what you expect all Colleges to provide. The second section asks you to rank the College you chose for the survey according to your experiences and perceptions.

SERVQUAL Importance Weights

Listed below are the five sets of features pertaining to Colleges and the services they offer. We would like to know how much each of these sets of features is important to the Student. Please allocate 100 points among the five sets of features according to how important it is to you. Make sure the points add up to 100.

Features Points

1. The appearance of the Colleges physical facilities, equipment, personnel and communication materials.

2. The College's ability to perform the promised service dependably and accurately

3. The Colleges willingness to help Students and provide prompt service.

4. The knowledge and courtesy of the College's employees and their ability to convey trust and confidence.

5. The caring individual attention the College provides its Students.

Total: 100

1. What is your gender?

Male

Female 2. Which state do you belong to? _______________________ 3. What was your Majors In Graduation?

BA

B.Com

B.Tech/B.Sc

Others 4. What is your ANNUAL household income (INR)?

2- 3 Lakhs

4-6 Lakhs

7-9 Lakhs

9 Lakhs and Above


Expectations This section of the survey deals with your opinions of Colleges. Please show the extent to which you think Colleges should possess the following features. What we are interested in here is a number that best shows you expectations about institutions offering their services. You should rank each statement as follows: Strongly Strongly Disagree Agree 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Statement Score

1. Excellent Colleges will have modern looking equipment.

2. The physical facilities at excellent Colleges will be visually appealing.

3. Employees at excellent Colleges will be neat in their appearance.

4. Materials associated with the service (pamphlets or statements) will be visually appealing at an excellent College.

5. When excellent Colleges promise to do something by a certain time, they do.

6. When a Student has a problem, excellent Colleges will show a sincere interest in solving it.

7. Excellent Colleges will perform the service right the first time.

8. Excellent Colleges will provide the service at the time they promise to do so.

9. Excellent Colleges will insist on error free records.

10. Employees of excellent Colleges will tell Students exactly when services will be performed.

11. Employees of excellent Colleges will give prompt service to Students.

12. Employees of excellent Colleges will always be willing to help Students.

13. Employees of excellent Colleges will never be too busy to respond to Students' requests.

14. The behaviour of employees in excellent Colleges will instil confidence in Students

15. Students of excellent Colleges will feel safe in transactions.

16. Employees of excellent Colleges will be consistently courteous with Students.

17. Employees of excellent Colleges will have the knowledge to answer Students' questions.

18. Excellent Colleges will give Students individual attention.

19. Excellent Colleges will have operating hours convenient to all their Students.

20. Excellent Colleges will have employees who give Students personal service.

21. Excellent Colleges will have their Students' best interest at heart.

22. The employees of excellent Colleges will understand the specific needs of their Students.


Perceptions/Experience The following statements relate to your feelings about the particular College you have chosen. Please show the extent to which you believe this College has the feature described in the statement. Here, we are interested in a number from 1 to 7 that shows your perceptions about the College. You should rank each statement as follows: Strongly Strongly Disagree Agree 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Statement Score

1. The College has modern looking equipment.

2. The College's physical features are visually appealing.

3. The College's reception desk employees are neat appearing.

4. Materials associated with the service (such as pamphlets or statements) are visually appealing at the College.

5. When the College promises to do something by a certain time, it does so.

6. When you have a problem, the College shows a sincere interest in solving it.

7. The College performs the service right the first time.

8. The College provides its service at the time it promises to do so.

9. The College insists on error free records.

10. Employees in the College tell you exactly when the services will be performed.

11. Employees in the College give you prompt service.

12. Employees in the College are always willing to help you.

13. Employees in the College are never too busy to respond to your request.

14. The behaviour of employees in the College instils confidence in you.

15. You feel safe in your transactions with the College.

16. Employees in the College are consistently courteous with you.

17. Employees in the College have the knowledge to answer your questions.

18. The College gives you individual attention.

19. The College has operating hours convenient to all its Students.

20. The College has employees who give you personal attention.

21. The College has your best interests at heart.

22. The employees of the College understand your specific needs.

study of service quality in a b-school with servqual model · study of service quality in a...

Documents