Scribd
Upload
146 views5 pages

Gap Model of Mos

SERVQUAL is a framework for measuring service quality developed in the 1980s. It identifies five dimensions that impact customer perceptions of quality - reliability, assurance, tangibles, empathy, and responsiveness. SERVQUAL also proposes five "gaps" between customer expectations and perceptions that can occur, from management perception of customer wants to differences between expected and experienced service. The model provides a way for businesses to measure quality across these dimensions and identify areas for improvement.

Uploaded by

Avinash Agrawal
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
146 views5 pages

Gap Model of Mos

SERVQUAL is a framework for measuring service quality developed in the 1980s. It identifies five dimensions that impact customer perceptions of quality - reliability, assurance, tangibles, empathy, and responsiveness. SERVQUAL also proposes five "gaps" between customer expectations and perceptions that can occur, from management perception of customer wants to differences between expected and experienced service. The model provides a way for businesses to measure quality across these dimensions and identify areas for improvement.

Uploaded by

Avinash Agrawal
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 5

GAP MODEL

SERVQUAL
SERVQUAL, later called RATER, is a quality management framework. SERVQUAL was
developed in the mid-1980s by Zeithaml, Parasuraman & Berry to measure quality in the service
sector.

Concept
The SERVQUAL service quality model was developed by a group of American authors, 'Parsu'
Parasuraman, Valarie Zeithaml and Len Berry, in 1988. It highlights the main components of
high quality service. The SERVQUAL authors originally identified ten elements of service
quality, but in later work, these were collapsed into five factors - reliability, assurance, tangibles,
empathy and responsiveness - that create the acronym RATER.
Businesses using SERVQUAL to measure and manage service quality deploy a questionnaire
that measures both the customer expectations of service quality in terms of these five

dimensions, and their perceptions of the service they receive. When customer expectations are
greater than their perceptions of received delivery, service quality is deemed low.
In additional to being a measurement model, SERVQUAL is also a management model. The
SERVQUAL authors identified five Gaps that may cause customers to experience poor service
quality.
PLEASE CONSIDER SERVQUAL AS MEASURE MODEL TO MEASURE SERVICE
QUALITY. FIVE GAPS OR GAP MODEL SUGGESTED BY SAME AUTHORS (WHO
GAVE SERVQUAL) IS A BASIC BUILDING BLOCK OF MARKETING OF SERVICES.

Gap 1: between consumer expectation and management perception


This gap arises when the management does not correctly perceive what the customers want. For
instance, hospital administrators may think patients want better food, but patients may be more
concerned with the responsiveness of the nurse. Key factors leading to this gap are:

Insufficient marketing research


Poorly interpreted information about the audience's expectations

Research not focused on demand quality

Too many layers between the front line personnel and the top level management

Gap 2: between management perception and service quality specification


Although the management might correctly perceive what the customer wants, they may not set
an appropriate performance standard. An example would be when hospital administrators instruct
nurses to respond to a request fast, but may not specify how fast. Gap 2 may occur due to the
following reasons:

Insufficient planning procedures


Lack of management commitment

Unclear or ambiguous service design

Unsystematic new service development process

Gap 3: between service quality specification and service delivery


This gap may arise through service personnel being poorly trained, incapable or unwilling to
meet the set service standard. The possible major reasons for this gap are:

Deficiencies in human resource policies such as ineffective recruitment, role ambiguity,


role conflict, improper evaluation and compensation system

Ineffective internal marketing

Failure to match demand and supply

Lack of proper customer education and training

Gap 4: between service delivery and external communication


Consumer expectations are highly influenced by statements made by company representatives
and advertisements. The gap arises when these assumed expectations are not fulfilled at the time
of delivery of the service. For example, the hospital printed on the brochure may have clean and
furnished rooms, but in reality it may be poorly maintained, in which case the patients'
expectations are not met. The discrepancy between actual service and the promised one may
occur due to the following reasons:

Over-promising in external communication campaign


Failure to manage customer expectations

Failure to perform according to specifications

Gap 5: between expected service and experienced service


This gap arises when the consumer misinterprets the service quality. For example, a physician
may keep visiting the patient to show and ensure care, but the patient may interpret this as an
indication that something is really wrong.

Determinants
The ten determinants that may influence the appearance of a gap are:
1. Competence is the possession of the required skills and knowledge to perform the
service. For example, there may be competence in the knowledge and skill of contact
personnel, knowledge and skill of operational support personnel and research capabilities
of the organization.
2. Courtesy is the consideration for the customer's property and a clean and neat
appearance of contact personnel, manifesting as politeness, respect, and friendliness.
3. Credibility includes factors such as trustworthiness, belief and honesty. It involves
having the customer's best interests at prime position. It may be influenced by company
name, company reputation and the personal characteristics of the contact personnel.
4. Security enables the customer to feel free from danger, risk or doubt including physical
safety, financial security and confidentiality.
5. Access is approachability and ease of contact. For example, convenient office operation
hours and locations.

6. Communication means both informing customers in a language they are able to


understand and also listening to customers. A company may need to adjust its language
for the varying needs of its customers. Information might include for example,
explanation of the service and its cost, the relationship between services and costs and
assurances as to the way any problems are effectively managed.
7. Knowing the customer means making an effort to understand the customer's individual
needs, providing individualized attention, recognizing the customer when they arrive and
so on. This in turn helps to delight the customers by rising above their expectations.
8. Tangibles are the physical evidence of the service, for instance, the appearance of the
physical facilities, tools and equipment used to provide the service; the appearance of
personnel and communication materials and the presence of other customers in the
service facility.
9. Reliability is the ability to perform the promised service in a dependable and accurate
manner. The service is performed correctly on the first occasion, the accounting is
correct, records are up to date and schedules are kept.
10. Responsiveness is the readiness and willingness of employees to help customers by
providing prompt timely services, for example, mailing a transaction slip immediately or
setting up appointments quickly.
By the early 1990s, the authors had refined the model to five factors that enable the acronym
RATER:
1. Reliability: the ability to perform the promised service dependably and accurately
2. Assurance: the knowledge and courtesy of employees and their ability to convey trust and
confidence
3. Tangibles: the appearance of physical facilities, equipment, personnel and communication
materials
4. Empathy: the provision of caring, individualized attention to customers
5. Responsiveness: the willingness to help customers and to provide prompt service
The simplified RATER model allows customer service experiences to be explored and assessed
quantitatively and has been used widely by service delivery organizations.
Nyeck, Morales, Ladhari, and Pons (2002) stated the SERVQUAL measuring tool appears to
remain the most complete attempt to conceptualize and measure service quality (p. 101). The
SERVQUAL measuring tool has been used by several researchers to examine numerous service
industries such as healthcare, banking, financial services, and education (Nyeck, Morales,
Ladhari, & Pons, 2002).

Criticisms

Francis Buttle critiques SERVQUAL in the article SERVQUAL; review, critique, research
agenda" and comes up with two clusters of criticisms based on theoretical and operational
criteria. Nyeck, Morales, Ladhari, and Pons (2002) reviewed 40 articles that made use of
SERVQUAL and discovered that few researchers concern themselves with the validation of the
measuring tool.

References

Zeithaml, Parasuraman & Berry, "Delivering Quality Service; Balancing Customer


Perceptions and Expectations," Free Press, 1990.
Francis Buttle, 1996, "SERVQUAL: review, critique, research agenda," European Journal
of Marketing, Vol.30, Issue 1, pp. 831

Luis Filipe Lages & Joana Cosme Fernandes, 2005, "The SERPVAL scale: A multi-item
instrument for measuring service personal values", Journal of Business Research, Vol.58,
Issue 11, pp. 15621572.

Deborah McCabe, Mark S. Rosenbaum, and Jennifer Yurchisin (2007), Perceived


Service Quality and Shopping Motivations: A Dynamic Relationship, Services
Marketing Quarterly, 29 (1), 1-21.

Nyeck, S., Morales, M., Ladhari, R., & Pons, F. (2002). "10 years of service quality
measurement: reviewing the use of the SERVQUAL instrument." Cuadernos de Difusion,
7(13), 101-107. Retrieved July 8, 2007, from EBSCOhost database.

Categories:
Knowledge representation
Marketing

Quality management

You might also like