1. Service Quality The S E R V Q U A L Model Reliability Assurance
Tangibles
Empathy
Responsive-ness

2. Introduction
Service quality is an approach to manage business processes in order to ensure full satisfaction of the customers & quality in service provided.
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. 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
Empathy
Responsiveness

4. The Key Service Dimensions
The five SERVQUAL dimensions are: R-A-T-E-R:
RESPONSIVENESS - Willingness to help customers and provide prompt service
ASSURANCE - Knowledge and courtesy of employees and their ability to convey trust and confidence
TANGIBLES - Appearance of physical facilities, equipment, personnel, and communication materials
EMPATHY - Caring, individualized attention the firm provides its customers
RELIABILITY - Ability to perform the promised service dependably and accurately

5. 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

6. 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.

7. Gap 2 The SERVQUAL Gaps 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.

8. Gap 3 The SERVQUAL Gaps Commonly known as the Service delivery gap.
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.
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.

9. Gap 4 The SERVQUAL Gaps 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
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.

10. 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.

11. Causes for the Gaps GAP 1 - not knowing what customers expect 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. Causes for the Gaps GAP 2 - The wrong service quality standards
inadequate commitment to service quality
lack of perception of feasibility
the absence of goal setting
Insufficient planning of procedures

13. Causes for the Gaps GAP 3 - The service performance gap 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
Lack of teamwork within the organisation

14. Causes for the Gaps GAP 4 - When promises do not match actual delivery
Over-promising in external communication campaign
Failure to manage customer expectations
Failure to perform according to specifications given to customers

15. Causes for the Gaps
GAP 5 - The difference between customer perception of service and the expectation they hadUsually 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

16. Solution for the Gaps
No Solutions as such, but rather, measures that can be taken to minimize the gaps
Gap
Definitions
Measures 1
Customers’ expectations versus management perceptions
Use of good Customer Relationship Management Techniques to profile & know customer’s expectations, tastes and needs
E.g: XYZ Events Ltd should conduct sample surveys to know what customers expect nowadays 2
Management perceptions versus service specifications
Managers need to make sure the organization is defining the level of service they believe is needed.
E.g.: XYZ Events Ltd could have offered pre-set wedding packages at different prices with different services set. 3
Service specifications versus service delivery
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.: XYZ Events Ltd needs to ask customers to give their post experience feedbacks 4
Service delivery versus external communication:
Use of good Communication skills and avoid ambiguous or fraudulent 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 customer expectations and their perceptions of the service delivered
Application of all the above measures to make sure the service delivered meets the expectations of the customer

17. Advantages of SERVQUAL
Disadvantages 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.
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.

18. 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.
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

19. Uses of SERVQUAL
To assess a company's service quality along each of the 5 SERVQAL dimensions.
To track customer's expectations and perceptions over time
To compare a company's 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 assess internal service quality (interdepartmental comparison)

20. Applications of SERVQUAL
Service quality has become an important research topic because of its apparent relationship to costs, profitability, customer satisfaction, and customer retention
Some of the published studies include :
Hotels ,travel and tourism
Car servicing, business schools
Accounting firms, architectural services
Airline catering
Mobile Telecommunications in Macedonia

21. Conclusions
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 customer's expectations and perceptions over time to compare the company's SERVQUAL scores against competitors.