Page 8 - revista Ingeniantes 4 No1 Vol 1 Interectivo
P. 8
Revista Ingeniantes 2017 Año 4 No. 1 Vol. 1
The structure of this research is as follows: Section 2 lled ‘SERVPERF’, illustrating that service quality is a
presents the conceptualization of experience of qua- form of consumer attitude. They argued that SER-
lity. Section 3 the Customers’ Expectations of Service VPERF was an enhanced means of measuring the
is shown. Section 4 presents the SERVPERF Model, service quality construct. Their study was later repli-
Section 5 presents the Cronbach’s Alpha. Section 6 cated and findings suggest that little if any theoretical
shows the methodology. Section 7 the results of the or empirical evidence supports the relevance of the
research are shown. Section 8 presents the conclu- E-P= quality gap as the basis for measuring service
sions. Finally, references are shown in Section 9. quality [10]. In equation form, SERVPERF service qua-
MATERIAL AND METHODS lity can be expressed as:
2. EXPERIENCE OF QUALITY
Service Quality is crucial in any organization as it helps
create the bond between the business and its clients
[4]. In today’s competitive business environment, ser- = ∑ Eq. (1)
vice quality is very important to attract and retain cus-
tomers. This is due to the fact that customers derive Where: =
their perceptions of service quality on the levels of
satisfaction they experience with a particular business Qi = perceived quality by individual i;
[5]. Businesses need to be able to satisfy customers k = number of attributes;
and meet their expectations of service quality in or- Pij = perception of individual “i” with respect to per-
der to gain competitive advantage [4]. Thus, marketers formance of a service firm on attribute “j”.
need to continually assess customers’ expectations of Wj = attribute importance “j” in quality perception.
service quality in order to avoid customer dissatisfac-
tion [6]. 5. Cronbach’s Alpha
Service quality is a measure of how well the servi- There are various types of reliability coefficients.
ce level delivered matches customer expectations. Cronbach’s (1951) alpha is one of the most common-
Service quality results from customers’ expecta- ly used reliability coefficients and for this reason the
tions of what the service provider should offer and properties of this coefficient will be emphasized
how the provider actually performs to meet tho- here. Cronbach’s (1951) alpha was developed based
se expectations [7]. Thus, delivering service quali- on the necessity to evaluate items scored in multiple
ty means ensuring consistency in service delivery answer categories. Cronbach (1951) derived the alpha
performances on a daily basis. According to Kotler formula from the KR-20 formula:
(2007: 68) service quality is very important to attract
and retain customers. This is due to the fact that − 20 = ( 1) [1 − ∑ ] Eq. (2)
customers derive the perceptions of service quality − 2
on the levels of satisfaction they experience with the
particular business [8]. Where:
3. Customer’s Expectations of Service K = the number of items
Customer expectations are beliefs about service de- P = the proportion of people with score 4
livery that function as standards or reference points q = the proportion of people with score 1
against which performance is judged. Customers hold σ = the variance of the total measurement
different types of expectations for service performan-
ce. Customers compare their perceptions of service When items are perfectly correlated, and have mixed
delivery with these reference points when evaluating signs, the sum of item variances will be greater than
service quality, therefore, knowing what customers the total score variance. When the individual score va-
expect is critical in gaining competitive advantage. riance is greater than total score, internal consistency
Failure to understand the levels of service customers is non-existent between the item scores; therefore, the
expects can mean losing a customer to competitors items are measuring different concepts. In general, as
who are able to meet customer’s expectations and items are more correlated, shared variance increases,
therefore be at a risk of losing business [9]. increasing internal consistency; therefore increasing the
magnitude of the alpha coefficient [11].
6. Methodology
In this section, once the concept of quality experience
is presented, the methodology for the implementation
of the model SERVPEF at a university is demonstrated
through the five dimensions perceived by customers.
4. SERVPERF Model 1. Select and specify the dimensions and attributes that
Cronin and Taylor (1992) in their empirical work pre- underlie the service of quality provided by the university.
sented the framework of Parasuraman, Zeithaml and 2. Provide information on the level of dimensions: tangi-
Berry (1985, 1988), with respect to conceptualization bility, reliability, responsiveness, assurance, and empa-
and measurement of service quality, and propounded thy in public services.
a performance-based measure of service quality ca-
04
