The Determinants of Service Quality : Satisfiers and Dissatisfirers
The determinants of service quality: satisfiers and dissatisfiers
Robert Johnston
University of Warwick, Coventry, UK
Introduction There appear to be five major debates taking place in the service quality area. One debate concerns the similarities and differences between the constructs of service quality and satisfaction (see e.g. Anderson and Sullivan, 1993; Bolton and Drew, 1991; Cronin and Taylor, 1992, 1994; Oliver, 1993; Parasuraman et al., 1988; Taylor, 1993; Zeithaml et al., 1993). There appears to be a consensus emerging that satisfaction refers to the outcome of individual service transactions and the overall service encounter, whereas service quality is the customer’s overall impression of the relative inferiority/superiority of the organization and its services (Bitner and Hubbert, 1994). A second debate is about the efficacy of the expectation-perception gap view of service quality, which is similar to the disconfirmation theory found in the consumer behaviour literature (see, for example, Berry et al., 1985; Grönroos, 1984, 1990; Haywood-Farmer and Nollet, 1991; Parasuraman et al., 1994). Some researchers now believe that there is strong empirical evidence that service quality should be measured using performance-based measures (see for example Babakus and Boller, 1992; Cronin and Taylor, 1994). A third debate is concerned with the development of models that help our understanding of how the perception gap arises and how managers can minimize or manage its effect (see, for example, Brogowicz et al., 1990; Grönroos, 1990; Gummesson and Grönroos, 1987; Parasuraman et al., 1985). A fourth debate concerns the definition and use of the zone of tolerance. Berry and Parasuraman (1991) suggested that “the zone of tolerance is a range of service performance that a customer considers satisfactory”. The importance of the zone of tolerance is that customers may accept variation within a range of performance and any increase in performance within this area will
Robert Johnston
University of Warwick, Coventry, UK
Introduction There appear to be five major debates taking place in the service quality area. One debate concerns the similarities and differences between the constructs of service quality and satisfaction (see e.g. Anderson and Sullivan, 1993; Bolton and Drew, 1991; Cronin and Taylor, 1992, 1994; Oliver, 1993; Parasuraman et al., 1988; Taylor, 1993; Zeithaml et al., 1993). There appears to be a consensus emerging that satisfaction refers to the outcome of individual service transactions and the overall service encounter, whereas service quality is the customer’s overall impression of the relative inferiority/superiority of the organization and its services (Bitner and Hubbert, 1994). A second debate is about the efficacy of the expectation-perception gap view of service quality, which is similar to the disconfirmation theory found in the consumer behaviour literature (see, for example, Berry et al., 1985; Grönroos, 1984, 1990; Haywood-Farmer and Nollet, 1991; Parasuraman et al., 1994). Some researchers now believe that there is strong empirical evidence that service quality should be measured using performance-based measures (see for example Babakus and Boller, 1992; Cronin and Taylor, 1994). A third debate is concerned with the development of models that help our understanding of how the perception gap arises and how managers can minimize or manage its effect (see, for example, Brogowicz et al., 1990; Grönroos, 1990; Gummesson and Grönroos, 1987; Parasuraman et al., 1985). A fourth debate concerns the definition and use of the zone of tolerance. Berry and Parasuraman (1991) suggested that “the zone of tolerance is a range of service performance that a customer considers satisfactory”. The importance of the zone of tolerance is that customers may accept variation within a range of performance and any increase in performance within this area will