Analyse the Operation in Term of the Servuction Model (Spilt the Operation Into as Many or Few Components as You Like). What Opportunities Exist for Separation Between the Visible and Invisible Service Delivery
1. Analyse the operation in term of the Servuction model (spilt the operation into as many or few components as you like). What opportunities exist for separation between the visible and invisible service delivery components allowing for streamlining of the “factory”?
Hoffman (2011) claims, “Service knowledge is acquired differently, than knowledge pertaining to goods”. For example: Due to the intangible nature of service it cannot be sampled before, but can only be experienced through simultaneous consumption process when being delivered. Whereas a tangible product such as food, clothes etc., can be sampled prior to purchase. “All products whether goods or services, deliver a bundle of benefits to the consumer. The benefit concept is the encapsulation of these tangible and intangible benefits in the consumers mind” (Hoffman, 2011). When a consumer uses or experiences a good they do not physically witness where the good has been manufactured (production factory). On the other hand to experience a service the consumer must physically be present in the factory (example: restaurant) for the simultaneous consumption to take place. This concept is widely understood all over the world, however hospitality organisations are not actively involving consumers in the entire service delivery process.
Research indicates that every organisation has both invisible and visible side to its operations. According to Srinivasan (2009 p. 300), “The Servuction model depicts the factors that influence the service experience, including those that are visible to the customer and those that are not”. Hoffman (2011), “The Servuction Model suggests that the benefits derived by the service customer are influenced by the direct interaction with: (1) the servicescape; (2) contact personal or service provider and (3) other customers”. Hoffman (2011 p. 11) adds, “Of course, the visible components that compromise the Servuction model cannot exist in isolation and indeed, they have to be
Hoffman (2011) claims, “Service knowledge is acquired differently, than knowledge pertaining to goods”. For example: Due to the intangible nature of service it cannot be sampled before, but can only be experienced through simultaneous consumption process when being delivered. Whereas a tangible product such as food, clothes etc., can be sampled prior to purchase. “All products whether goods or services, deliver a bundle of benefits to the consumer. The benefit concept is the encapsulation of these tangible and intangible benefits in the consumers mind” (Hoffman, 2011). When a consumer uses or experiences a good they do not physically witness where the good has been manufactured (production factory). On the other hand to experience a service the consumer must physically be present in the factory (example: restaurant) for the simultaneous consumption to take place. This concept is widely understood all over the world, however hospitality organisations are not actively involving consumers in the entire service delivery process.
Research indicates that every organisation has both invisible and visible side to its operations. According to Srinivasan (2009 p. 300), “The Servuction model depicts the factors that influence the service experience, including those that are visible to the customer and those that are not”. Hoffman (2011), “The Servuction Model suggests that the benefits derived by the service customer are influenced by the direct interaction with: (1) the servicescape; (2) contact personal or service provider and (3) other customers”. Hoffman (2011 p. 11) adds, “Of course, the visible components that compromise the Servuction model cannot exist in isolation and indeed, they have to be