Australian Journal of Public Administration, vol. 00, no. 0, pp. 1–12 doi:10.1111/1467-8500.

12252

Research and Evaluation

Determinant Factors of Satisfaction with Public

Services in Spain

Roxana Alemán, Ramón Gutiérrez-Sánchez,

and Francisco Liébana-Cabanillas
University of Granada

The concept of marketing has evolved significantly, as have its applications in various
sectors, including services. Diverse opinions have been expressed for and against the use of
marketing techniques in public administration. In this paper, we present a conceptual and
methodological review of the main contributions made by marketing to the public sector,
measuring variables and related concepts that determine public satisfaction with public
services. These elements, termed key drivers of opinion, were measured by reference to the
information provided by the Spanish Sociological Research Centre (CIS), and provide an
alternative way to display and analyse the data of interest, through perception models and
figures using multivariate factor analysis. In this study, the components or factors containing
the main drivers of opinion were found to be, on the one hand, commitment to efficient service,
and on the other, user convenience.

Key words: public marketing, measuring client satisfaction, factorial analysis, government

Introduction International studies have been conducted

to determine users’ satisfaction with public
The consideration of public sector organisa- services (Gao 2012). This has been done in the
tions from a marketing standpoint is still a rela- United Kingdom by the market research com-
tively new approach for researchers (Kotler and pany Ipsos MORI and in Canada by the Institute
Lee 2007; Peattie et al. 2012). In this con- for Citizen-Centred Service. In the United
text, an important aspect of maintaining and States, it is performed by the private company
expanding public services is the construction American Customer Satisfaction Index, as
of clients’ satisfaction and trust (Corbin et al. a national economic indicator of customer
2001). Although opinions differ in this field, satisfaction with most goods and services
in many countries ever more attention is be- produced in the US economy. In the European
ing paid by government agencies to questions Community, user satisfaction is measured by
such as service, clients, and public satisfaction. the Eurobarometer and by the Urban Audit
Kaplan and Haenlein (2009) highlighted that database compiled by Eurostat, which compiles
the public sector then accounted for almost half information on standards of life in 258 large
of the economic activity within the European and medium-sized cities in the 27 countries of
Union, but nevertheless this question has not the Union. In Spain, the Agency for Assess-
been granted a corresponding level of impor- ment and Quality publishes annual reports,
tance in academic research. commissioned by the Government, on policies,
programmes, and public services managed by
the central government. These reports are gen-
Accepted for publication: March 24, 2017 erated from data supplied by the Sociological


C 2017 Institute of Public Administration Australia
2 Marketing Techniques in Public Administration xxxx 2017

Research Centre (CIS), an autonomous body the development of a customer-oriented ap-

that forms part of the Ministry of the Presi- proach, similar to that found in the private
dency, and whose purpose is to study Spanish sector (Kouzmin et al. 1999). According to
society. It has conducted over 65 different Abdullah and Zamhari (2013), fairness and jus-
studies in the last 30 years (Gregg and Del tice are always the greatest concerns of pub-
Pino 2009). lic sector agencies. But greater competitive-
The aim of this paper is to analyse the key ness and market orientation can conflict with
drivers of quality that influence clients’ satis- the promotion of fairness and justice, and so
faction with public services. This is done tak- it can be difficult to establish criteria for the
ing into account the Public Services Quality cost-benefit relation in the public service. Nev-
Assessment Reports published by the CIS, and ertheless, these challenges and obstacles must
apply multivariate factorial analysis. On the ba- be faced by the government. A given level of
sis of the results obtained, and the conclusions performance of public sector services must be
drawn from them, recommendations are made established in order to ensure national prosper-
to enable public agencies to raise levels of sat- ity. Improving service quality will make pub-
isfaction with public services. lic sector organisations more productive and
less of a burden on the economy, reducing the
need for tax revenues and making domestic in-
The Marketing of Public Services dustry more competitive in the global market
(Cohen and Brand 1993). In this respect, Furn-
Public marketing concerns the activities of ham (1983) and Glaser and Hildreth (1999)
the public sector in its entirety (Santesmases suggested there is a positive relationship be-
2004), including central government, public tween perceptions of satisfactory provision of
companies, foundations, agencies, regional and public services and a willingness to pay taxes.
provincial governments, departments, and local In other words, the more transactions that take
authorities. According to Vásquez (2006), the place between the public and service providers,
purpose of public marketing is to ensure the the more satisfied the population will be.
simultaneous achievement of the objectives of Differing views have been expressed regard-
collective utility, resultant utility, and admin- ing the definition of customers of public ser-
istrative outcome, taking into account the re- vices (Alford and Yates 2015). One that is
sources available. In this respect, too, Barranco widely accepted stresses the client-oriented ap-
(2008) observed that public marketing is the proach to service delivery, arguing that citi-
marketing applied to actions by official institu- zens should be considered and treated as clients
tions that have a direct impact on the popula- (Osbourne and Gaebler 1992). Various terms
tion’s quality of life. Public marketing seeks to for the latter have been used in these defini-
facilitate access to these services, meeting so- tions, including customers, citizens, and sub-
cial needs in an effective, efficient, and trans- jects. According to Mintzberg (1996), clients
parent manner, subject only to budget limita- should be treated well and services should be
tions. In the public sector, the phenomenon of designed for their benefit. Clients purchase
‘marketisation’ (Proctor 2007) is becoming in- products and services, but citizens have rights
creasingly apparent, in the sense that certain that go far beyond those of clients. Indeed, cit-
aspects of public sector activities are coming to izens have not only rights, but also duties, as
resemble commercial marketing. subjects, including the duty to pay taxes, to
In recent public sector reforms, many govern- enlist in the army (in some societies) and to
ment agencies have been encouraged to adopt respect the law.
private sector management practices (Mabey In 1991, the British government, and the
and Skinner 1998), for reasons such as in- Prime Minister, John Major, presented the
creased competition, anti-monopoly legislation Citizen’s Charter, taking a new approach in
(Morley and Vilkinas 1997), the need for prof- which citizens were viewed as customers. This
itability and accountability, and emphasis on Charter set out parameters or standards aimed


C 2017 Institute of Public Administration Australia
 Alemán, Gutiérrez-Sánchez and Liébana-Cabanillas 3

at guaranteeing the satisfaction of citizens public sector. These authors argue that market-
with many public services, including health- ing can help the government to act with qual-
care, schools, police, and municipal utilities ity, speed, efficiency, convenience, and fair-
(Rodrı́guez 2012). Since then, Canada, the ness. However, Puig (2004) believes that while
USA, and various EU countries, among others, the public administration can learn from com-
have adopted similar initiatives. On the other panies, it should not copy them, because the
hand, criticisms have also been made of this concepts, methods, and tools of marketing can-
focus on citizens as clients of the government, not be transferred unthinkingly; rather, mod-
arguing that the relationship between govern- els should be developed that take account of
ment and the population is not the same as that the particular characteristics of the public sec-
between the private sector and its customers tor (Puig et al. 1999). In the social sciences,
(Denhardt and Denhardt 2000), and that to a the use of sophisticated techniques and applied
democratic government, what matters is ac- methods such as surveys, focus groups or inter-
countability, not the benefits of the market or views, addressing citizens directly, means that
citizens’ satisfaction (Kettl 2005); according the information thus compiled is increasingly
to Kelly (2003), citizens should be not only valuable for policy design, service reforms, or
clients but also owners of their government or accountability (Bruning 2010).
administration; therefore, the emphasis should
be placed on active participation rather than
passive consumption (Myers 1996). Finally, Determinants of Satisfaction with Public
Aberbach and Christensen (2005) concluded Services
that serious problems can arise in seeking to
treat the citizen as a client, both in theory and The constructs of satisfaction and service qual-
in practice. ity have been viewed in various ways regarding
Despite these criticisms, Gregg and Del Pino their causality; in most studies, service quality
(2009) believes that government can very prob- is considered to precede satisfaction (Anderson
ably combine the two imperatives: to be demo- et al. 1994; Taylor and Baker 1994), but some
cratically accountable, valuing citizens as such authors take the contrary view (Bitner 1990;
(owners), and at the same time, to safeguard Parasuraman et al. 1991). For the purposes of
service quality and maximise citizens’ satis- the present study, we assume that the positive
faction. Pasquier (2009), too, argues that there evaluation of service quality by citizens pro-
are reasons for increasing the use of marketing duces satisfaction (AEVAL 2009).
tools, such as the nature of the tasks under- The concept of perceived quality was de-
taken and the greater demands being presented fined by Zeithaml (1988) as the judgment made
by the population; hence, it is necessary to dif- by the consumer or user of the superiority or
ferentiate the services offered and to analyse excellence of a product. Applied to services,
the extent to which the recipients of these ser- this would mean an overall judgment, or atti-
vices feel involved (indeed, this is an important tude, concerning the superiority of the service
condition for certain marketing instruments to (Parasuraman et al. 1988). Gefen (2000) later
be applied). defined this concept as the subjective com-
Two main methodological approaches to the parison that consumers make between the ser-
field of public marketing have been suggested: vice quality they wish for and that actually re-
on the one hand, to transplant the models cur- ceived. In this respect, most definitions used
rently being applied in the private sector, with- by researchers focus on the overall level of ex-
out radical changes; and on the other, to adjust cellence that consumers associate with a ser-
public budgets taking into consideration the pe- vice, and this is determined by their evalua-
culiarities of the public sector (Flores 2015). tion of its technical and functional attributes.
The first of these approaches was proposed Service quality has been studied under the
by Kotler and Lee (2011), for whom the tra- confirmatory paradigm, that is, the evaluation
ditional concepts of marketing work well in the of perceived service quality according to the


C 2017 Institute of Public Administration Australia
4 Marketing Techniques in Public Administration xxxx 2017

difference between expectations and outcomes 2008). In addition, studies have been conducted
(Cristóbal 2000), although this comparison is to measure service quality in the public sector
actually made on the basis of continuous as- (Kosecik and Sagbas 2004; Porumbescu 2017;
sessment (Grönroos 1994). Parasuraman et al. Wæraas 2015; Urvikis 2016). Most studies that
(1985) highlighted the difficulty of measuring have assessed the service quality provided by
the quality of services, in many cases, due to public organisations have used SERVQUAL for
their very nature (intangibility, heterogeneity, this purpose (Azmi et al. 2009). Ten linearly
and inseparability), which obliges suppliers to independent factors are identified that deter-
focus on analysing service quality from the mine service quality. These factors were ob-
point of view of the consumer. tained from a study of the users of a wide range
Precisely because the concept itself is so of services (Gadea 2000) and adapted for the
complex, many authors have referred to the present study of public services, as follows:
multidimensionality of service quality in order (1) Reliability: the work should be well done,
to approach its meaning. The multidimensional the first time; (2) Responsiveness: tasks should
approach has been studied on many occasions, be performed rapidly and in timely fashion; (3)
with diverse scales being adopted in accor- Competence: public employees should be qual-
dance with the study aims and scope in each ified to perform the tasks assigned to them;
case. The following scales and dimensions (4) Accessibility: services should be conve-
are among the most significant: (1) Garvin nient and easy to obtain; (5) Courtesy: citizens
(1984): performance, characteristics, reliabil- should be treated in a friendly way and with
ity, adherence, durability, aspects of the service the utmost attention; (6) Communication: users
itself, aesthetics, and perceived quality; (2) should be addressed in understandable lan-
Lehtinen and Lehtinen (1982): physical qual- guage; (7) Credibility: services and providers
ity, corporate quality, and interactive quality; should be honest and real; (8) Security: physi-
(3) Grönroos (1984): functional and corporate cal security and confidentiality should be guar-
technique; (4) Parasuraman et al. (1985): anteed; (9) Understanding: the administration
tangibles, reliability, responsiveness, profes- should be aware of the user’s point of view;
sionalism, courtesy, credibility, assurance, (10) Physical infrastructure: the environment
accessibility, communication, and empathy in which the services are provided should be
with the customer [SERVQUAL scale]; (5) pleasant and of good quality. The multivari-
Parasuraman et al. (1991): tangibles, re- ate application SERVQUAL (Zeithaml et al.
liability, responsiveness, assurance, and 1993) assigns the following weights to the im-
empathy. portance granted by service users to each of the
Service quality has received considerable 10 factors of perceived quality: (1) Reliability
attention from service marketing researchers 32%; (2) Responsiveness 22%; (3) Assurance
and numerous studies conducted to evaluate (courtesy, competence and credibility) 19%;
service quality have adapted the SERVQUAL (4) Empathy (accessibility, communication and
model (Bolton and Drew 1991; Sachdev and understanding) 16%; (5) Tangibles (physical
Verma 2004) for this purpose. The devel- infrastructure) 11%.
opment of models of service quality in the
public sector can lead to improvements in
quality management and help overcome the Method: Study Scope, Measuring Scales,
lack of purpose-built instruments (Galloway and Data Collection
1998). Studies of service quality have been
undertaken in various sectors, including ho- This study was conducted on the basis of
tels and tourism (Saleh and Ryan 1991), air- the results obtained from the 9th Public Ser-
line services (Abdullah et al. 2007), hospitals vices Quality Assessment survey, held in June
(Soliman 1993), education (Abdullah 2005, 2014 by the CIS in order to determine the
2006), banking (Abdullah et al. 2011), li- opinions of citizens about public services
braries (Sahu 2007), and in transport (Rashid in Spain. This survey was designed by the


C 2017 Institute of Public Administration Australia
 Alemán, Gutiérrez-Sánchez and Liébana-Cabanillas 5

Policy Evaluation Observatory on Service Table 1. Sociodemographic characteristics of the

Quality (AEVAL), and is available at the CIS study sample
website (http://www.cis.es). N %
The survey is based on a structured question-
naire administered by personal interview at the Total study sample 2479 100
respondents’ homes. It was conducted between Sex
Male 1208 48.7
11 and 25 June 2014 and included questions Female 1271 51.3
on satisfaction and other attitudes toward vari- Age
ous public services. The survey was addressed 18–29 405 16.34
to the entire resident population (not just those 30–41 590 23.80
of Spanish nationality), of both sexes and aged 42–53 551 22.23
54 – 65 437 17.63
18 years or more. The planned sample size was 66 – 77 336 13.55
2500 interviews, and 2479 interviews were car- 78–89 149 6.01
ried out (estimated margin of error of ±2% at a 90 or more 11 0.44
confidence level of 95.5% for the whole sam- Education background
ple). The questionnaire also contained sociode- None 0 0.00
mographic classification variables as shown Primary education 469 18.92
Secondary 1187 47.88
below (Table 1). education/vocational
The study goals were addressed using training
multivariate analysis, that is, simultaneously Higher education 722 29.12%
analysing several variables in each individual Other 101 4.07%
or object studied (Hair et al. 2010). If causal Employment status
relationships between the variables are not as- Employed 1015 40.95
sumed and only the relations or associations Unemployed 552 22.27
Student 131 5.28
among them need be determined, to observe Homemaker 180 7.26
how they are grouped, then it is appropriate to Pensioner 597 24.08
use the factorial analysis technique to examine Other employment 4 0.16
interdependencies and to detect the underlying situation
dimensions (Mestre 2012). Factorial analysis Professional status
is a multivariate approach that uses a linear Salaried employment 2150 86.73
Self employed 324 13.07
method to describe a large set of observable Other situation 5 0.20
variables using a limited number of hypotheti-
Net household income
cal ones, termed factors (Cuadras 2007). Fac- Less than 900 euros 455 18.40%
torial analysis is characterised as follows: it is 901–1800 euros 795 32.10%
descriptive and highlights interdependence; it 1801–3000 euros 343 13.80%
reduces the dimensionality of a phenomenon More than 3001 euros 127 5.10%
and aims to lose as little information as possi- No response 759 30.60%
ble; it considers all information available (i.e. it Source: Devised by the authors, from CIS data for 2014.
is exhaustive); it makes use of metric scales, of
intervals or ratios; it provides a graphical repre-
sentation for easier interpretation of the results
obtained. empathy (Parasuraman et al. 1988; Zeithaml
et al. 1993).
The data analysed were obtained from 2479
Analysis of Data and Results surveys, each containing nine key drivers re-
garding satisfaction with public services in
The variables considered to explain the quality 2014, and were systematised for analysis by
of public services are grouped in terms of the SPSS Statistics Base 20 statistical software
five dimensions proposed and weighted: tangi- package. Table 2 lists the variables taken into
bles, reliability, responsiveness, assurance, and consideration.


C 2017 Institute of Public Administration Australia
6 Marketing Techniques in Public Administration xxxx 2017

Table 2. Key drivers used in the study Table 4. Matrix of rotated componentsa

The professionalism of the staff who attended you Component

How you were treated by the staff
The information provided 1 2
Service provision hours
The professionalism of the staff who 0.868 0.301
The time you had to wait to be attended
attended you (P1401)
The state of the facilities
How you were treated by the staff 0.843 0.321
The time taken by the staff who attended you
(P1402)
The assurance that the procedure was resolved
The assurance that the procedure 0.819 0.345
correctly
was resolved correctly (P1408)
The time it took the administration to resolve the
The information provided (P1403) 0.819 0.364
procedure
The time taken by the staff who 0.742 0.468
Source: Devised by the authors, from CIS data for 2014. attended you (P1407)
The time it took the administration 0.726 0.451
to resolve the procedure (P1409)
Service provision hours (P1404) 0.306 0.814
Table 3. KMO test and Bartlett’s test The state of the facilities (P1406) 0.309 0.786
The time you had to wait to be 0.423 0.747
Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure 0.935 attended (P1405)
of sampling adequacy
Bartlett’s test of Approximate 17579.483 Extraction method: Principal components analysis. Rota-
sphericity chi-square tion method: Varimax with Kaiser normalisation.
a The rotation converged in three iterations
Degrees of 36.000
Source: Devised by the authors, from CIS data for 2014.
freedom
Descriptive 0.000
level of
significance The model, thus validated by factorial anal-
Source: Devised by the authors, from CIS data for 2014. ysis for the determinants of satisfaction with
public services, has two components: Commit-
ment and Convenience, as shown in Table 4.
The next step was to test whether the data The first component is clearly identified with
were suitable for the application of factorial the aspects related to the service provided, that
analysis. To do so, the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin is the relation between the user and the ser-
(KMO) test and Bartlett’s test were performed: vice provider, and in this respect professional-
Table 3 shows that the key drivers that in- ism and the personal treatment received are the
fluence satisfaction are related, and therefore main determinants of satisfaction with public
that the dimensions can be reduced. This is services (Table 5).
also evidenced by the KMO result, which was Figure 1, below, shows the components,
0.935 and thus above the 0.8 minimum re- with the respective variables. These variables
quired. Therefore, the data can be considered are represented in close proximity. This form
acceptable. This was confirmed by Bartlett’s of graphical representation in factorial anal-
test of sphericity, which produced a statistically ysis makes it possible to obtain a rapid in-
significant value (at descriptive p < 0.05) of terpretation of the model, by clearly showing
0.000 (11579.483; p < 0.05). Accordingly, the the different clusters formed by Components
factorial analysis procedure was applied in this 1 and 2.
study. It is also necessary to compare the variables
In the next step, the components or factors of the components obtained and to relate them
rotated by the Varimax method were extracted, to the theoretical findings used for reference.
thus facilitating the interpretation of the vari- This comparison shows that the drivers pri-
ables. The number of components was deter- oritised by our factorial model are among the
mined according to the percentage of total vari- determinants with the highest weightings sug-
ance. The variability was found to be 77.3% and gested by Zeithaml et al. (1993) for public ser-
two factors were selected. vices (Table 6).


C 2017 Institute of Public Administration Australia
 Alemán, Gutiérrez-Sánchez and Liébana-Cabanillas 7

Figure 1. Clusters Formed by Components 1 and 2 [Colour figure can be viewed at wileyonlineli-
brary.com]

Source: Devised by the Authors, from CIS Data for 2014

In the study model, the most important Many countries are now seeking to deter-
drivers were found to be related to reliability, mine levels of citizen satisfaction in order to
responsiveness, and assurance, while those re- improve their services or create new ones.
lated to tangible elements were of secondary However, the literature review shows that to
importance. The model shows that the most date little research has been conducted in this
important aspect for users of public services is respect.
the professionalism of the staff providing the Service quality is considered a driver of sat-
service, their treatment by the staff, and the isfaction, and therefore the SERVQUAL scale,
assurance that the procedure will be resolved adapted to public services, was used to deter-
correctly. On the other hand, less importance is mine the attributes or variables that contribute
granted to the time it takes the administration to satisfaction.
to resolve the process. The main determinants, or key drivers, of
the quality of public services can be identi-
Conclusions, Implications, and fied from users’ perceptions of public services.
Recommendations for Management Such studies are carried out in many countries
that wish to determine public opinion, and they
Research Conclusions often do so via public research agencies, such
as CIS in Spain.
The literature review conducted provides a Multidimensional analysis, based on the fac-
long-term overview of how the concept of pub- torial analysis technique, provides a valuable
lic marketing has evolved, especially in public alternative means of identifying the determi-
services, to contribute to improving the qual- nants of satisfaction with public services, the
ity of life of the population, and highlights the relations among these determinants, and the
increasing adoption of an approach in which prioritisation applied to them. Moreover, this
citizens are valued as customers, whose greater approach provides graphical options that en-
satisfaction must be sought. able speedy analysis.


C 2017 Institute of Public Administration Australia
8 Marketing Techniques in Public Administration xxxx 2017

Figure 2. Theoretical Model versus Study Model used

THEORETICAL MODEL vs. STUDY MODEL USED

Model
CIS (Spain)
Determinants. Zeithaml,
Parasuraman and Berry (1993)

1 Reliability 3 Assurance that the procedure was

resolved correctly

6 The time it took the administration to

2 Responsiveness resolve the procedure

1 The professionalism of the staff who

attended you
2 How you were treated by the staff
3 Assurance (Courtesy, 5 The time taken by the staff who attended
competence, credibility) you

4 The information provided

7 Service provision hours
4 Empathy (Accessibility,
9 The time you had to wait to be attended
communication,
understandability)

5 Tangibles 8 The state of the facilities

With regard to the key drivers of the quality of service and the state of the facilities, while the
public services, analysis shows that the Spanish most criticised driver was the time spent wait-
place most value on service delivery and con- ing for attention.
venience. Within the first of these components, The Figure 2 showing the factors (compo-
the following drivers were most highly rated: nents) illustrates the relationships among the
the professionalism of the staff, the treatment main determinants. The clusters formed clearly
provided, the assurance that the procedure was reflect the variables that make up the compo-
performed correctly, and the information sup- nents of delivery and convenience in the use of
plied. The areas considered in need of improve- public services.
ment were the time taken by staff in providing Comparison of the theoretical and the CIS
attention and the time taken by the Administra- Spain models shows that the drivers are related,
tion in resolving the procedure. overall. Security and reliability feature in both
Within the component ‘convenience’, the models, and the state of the facilities is consid-
most valued aspects were the hours of customer ered of least concern.


C 2017 Institute of Public Administration Australia
 Alemán, Gutiérrez-Sánchez and Liébana-Cabanillas 9

Table 5. Model validated by factorial analysis with the results obtained in previous research
in this field.
Components Variables
Many options are open for the further anal-
Component 1: The professionalism of the staff ysis of service quality, taking into account
Commitment who attended you (P1401) other multivariate analysis techniques not in-
How you were treated by the
staff (P1402)
corporated in this paper, such as correspon-
The assurance that the procedure dence analysis, cluster analysis, and multidi-
was resolved correctly (P1408) mensional scaling.
The information provided The main limitation of this study concerns
(P1403) how the information was obtained, that is the
The time taken by the staff who
attended you (P1407)
fact that the analysis is based on secondary data.
The time it took the Nevertheless, the database consulted is entirely
administration to resolve the appropriate to the purpose of this research.
procedure (P1409) Moreover, the analysis conducted, based on in-
formation about satisfaction with public ser-
Component 2: Service provision hours (P1404)
Convenience The state of the facilities (P1406) vices in Spain, can be easily replicated in other
The time you had to wait to be countries.
attended (P1405) Numerous studies have highlighted the im-
portance of sociodemographic variables in the
Source: Devised by the authors, from CIS data for 2014.
satisfaction obtained from public services, and
therefore future studies could be considered to
Table 6. Theoretical model vs. study model used determine which sociodemographic variables
are the most important in this respect.
Determinants. In addition, studies could be undertaken to
Zeithaml et al. (1993) Model CIS (Spain) compare different services, to determine which
1. Reliability 3 Assurance that the ones provide citizens the greatest satisfaction.
procedure was resolved It would also be useful to perform analyse
correctly the quality of the different types of services
2. Responsiveness 6 The time it took the offered. Another valuable approach would be
administration to
resolve the procedure to analyse the evolution of these determinants
3. Assurance 1 The professionalism of in recent years.
(Courtesy, competence the staff who attended
and credibility) you
2 How you were treated by References
the staff
5 The time taken by the Abdullah, F. 2005. ‘HEdPERF Versus SERVPERF:
staff who attended you The Quest for Ideal Measuring Instrument
4. Empathy 4 The information of Service Quality in Higher Education Sec-
(Accessibility, provided tor’. Quality Assurance in Education 13(4):305–
communication and
328.
understandability)
7 Service provision hours Abdullah, F. 2006. ‘Measuring Service Quality in
9 The time you had to wait Higher Education: HEdPERF Versus SERVPER’.
to be attended Marketing Intelligence and Planning 24(1):31–
5. Tangibles 8 The state of the facilities 47.
Abdullah, F. and U. A. Zamhari. 2013. ‘Manag-
ing Critical Factors Affecting Service Quality
for the Public Sector,’ in Proceedings of 23rd
Implications, Recommendations, International Business Research Conference,
Limitations, and Future Lines of Research Melbourne, 18–20 November 2013.
Abdullah, F., R. Suhaimi, G. Saban and J. Hamali.
In this study, the drivers of the quality of public 2011. ‘Bank Service Quality (BSQ) Index: An
services in Spain were analysed and compared Indicator of Service Performance’. International


C 2017 Institute of Public Administration Australia
10 Marketing Techniques in Public Administration xxxx 2017

Journal of Quality and Reliability Management Cristóbal, P. M. 2000. ‘Tres Estrategias Para Incor-
28(5):542–555. porar el Modelo EFQM a la Gestión del Ne-
Abdullah, K., N. Manaf and K. M. Noor. 2007. ‘Mea- gocio’. Qualitas Hodie: Excelencia, Desarrollo
suring the Service Quality of Airline Services in Sostenible E Innovación 61:14–15.
Malaysia’. IIUM Journal of Economics and Man- Cuadras, C. M. 2007. Nuevos Métodos de Análisis
agement 15(1):1–29. Multivariante. Barcelona: CMC Editions.
Aberbach, J., and T. Christensen. 2005. ‘Citizens and Denhardt, R. and J. Denhardt 2000. ‘The New Public
Consumers: An NPM Dilemma’. Public Manage- Service: Serving Rather than Steering’. Public
ment Review 7(2):225–245. Administration Review 60(6):549–559.
AEVAL. 2009. ‘Guı́a de la Evaluación de la Calidad Flores, I. 2015. ‘Marketing en el Sector Público:
de los Servicios Públicos’, Available from http:// Naturaleza, Aplicaciones y Desafios’, Con-
www.aeval.es/es/difusion_y_comunicacion/ tribuciones a las Ciencias Sociales. Available
publicaciones/Guias/Guias_Evaluacion_ from http://www.eumed.net/rev/cccss/2015/01/
Politicas_Publicas_y_Calidad_SSPP/guia_ ciudadanos.html
evaluacion_calidad.html Furnham, A. 1983. ‘The Protestant Work Ethic,
Alford, J. and S. Yates. 2015. ‘Co-Production Human Values and Attitudes Towards Taxation’.
of Public Services in Australia: The Roles of Journal of Economic Psychology 3(2):113–128.
Government Organisations and Co-Producers’. Gadea, A. 2000. Gesión de la Calidad en Servi-
Australian Journal of Public Administration cios Públicos. La Perspectiva de los Ciudadanos,
75(2):159–175 Clientes y Usuarios. España: Cuadernos IRC.
Anderson, E., C. Fornell and D. Lehmann. 1994. Galloway, L. 1998. ‘Quality Perceptions of Internal
‘Customer Satisfaction, Market Share, and Prof- and External Customers: A Case Study in Educa-
itability: Findings from Sweden’. Journal of Mar- tional Administration’. TQM Magazine 10(1):20–
keting 58(3):53–66. 26.
Azmi, I. A., Z. A. Ahmad and Y. Zainuddin. 2009. Gao, J. 2012. ‘How does Chinese Local Government
‘Competency-Based Pay and Service Quality: An Respond to Citizen Satisfaction Surveys? A Case
Empirical Study of Malaysian Public Organisa- Study of Foshan City’. Australian Journal of Pub-
tions’. Asian Academy of Management Journal lic Administration 71(2):136–147.
14(1):21–36. Garvin, D. A. 1984. ‘Product Quality: An Important
Barranco, S. J. 2008. ‘Marketing Blog sobre Strategic Weapon’. Business Horizons 27(3):40–
mercados de tendencia 21’, Available from 43.
http://www.tendencias21.net/marketing/ Gefen, D. 2000. ‘E-commerce: The Role of Famil-
Marketing-de-los-Servicios-Publicos_a45. iarity and Trust’. Omega 28(6):725–737.
html Glaser, M. A. and W. B. Hildreth. 1999. ‘Service De-
Bitner, M. J. 1990. ‘Evaluating Service Encoun- livery Satisfaction and Willingness to Pay Taxes:
ters: the Effects of Physical Surroundings and Citizen Recognition of Local Government Per-
Employee Responses’. Journal of Marketing formance’. Public Productivity and Management
54(2):69–82. Review 23(1):48–67.
Bolton, R. N., and J. H., Drew. 1991. ‘A Longitudi- Gregg G. V. and E. del Pino. 2009. ‘Como es-
nal Analysis of the Impact of Service Changes cuchar, como aprender y como responder: las
on Customer Attitudes’. Journal of Marketing encuestas ciudadanas como herramienta para la
55(1):1–9. reinvención del gobierno’, Available from http://
Bruning, E. 2010. ‘A Methodological Assessment www.aeval.es/es/difusion_y_comunicacion/
of Ten Years of Canada’s Citizen’s First Satisfac- publicaciones/Papeles/Papeles_de_Evaluacixn_
tion Survey Research’. International Review of nx_9.html
Administrative Sciences 76(1):85–91. Grönroos, C. 1984. ‘A service quality model and
Cohen, S. and R. Brand. 1993. Total Quality Man- its marketing implications’. European Journal of
agement in Government: A Practical Guide for Marketing 18(4):36–44.
the Real World. San Fransisco, CA: Jossey- Grönroos, C. 1994. Marketing y gestión de servicios:
Bass. la gestión de los momentos de la verdad y la
Corbin, C. L., S. W. Kelley and R. W. Schwartz. competencia en los servicios. Madrid: Ediciones
2001. ‘Concepts in Service Marketing for Health- Dı́az de Santos.
care Professionals’. American Journal of Surgery Hair, J. F., R. E. Anderson, B. J. Babin and W.
181(1):1–7. C. Black. (2010). Multivariate data analysis: A


C 2017 Institute of Public Administration Australia
 Alemán, Gutiérrez-Sánchez and Liébana-Cabanillas 11

global perspective. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pear- Transforming the Public Sector. Reading MA:
son. Addison Wesley.
Kaplan, A. M. and M. Haenlein. 2009. ‘The In- Parasuraman, A., L. L. Berry and V. A.
creasing Importance of Public Marketing: Expla- Zeithaml. 1991. ‘Refinement and Reassessment
nations, Applications and Limits of Marketing of the SERVQUAL Scale’. Journal of Retailing
within Public Administration’. European Man- 67(4):420–450.
agement Journal 27(3):197–212. Parasuraman, A., V. A. Zeithaml and L. L. Berry.
Kelly, J. 2003. ‘Citizen Satisfaction and Admin- 1985. ‘A Conceptual Model of Service Quality
istrative Performance Measures: Is There Re- and its Implications for Future Research’. Journal
ally a Link?’ Urban Affairs Review 38(6):855– of Marketing 49(4):41–50.
866. Parasuraman, A., V. A., Zeithaml and L. L. Berry.
Kettl, D. 2005. The Global Public Management Rev- 1988. ‘Servqual’. Journal of Retailing 64(1):12–
olution, 2nd ed. Washington, DC: Brookings. 40.
Kotler, P. and N. Lee 2011. Marketing del Sector Pasquier, M. 2009. ‘Marketing Polı́tico. Pro-
Público. Mexico: Fondo de cultura económica. gresos y lı́mites del marketing del sec-
Kotler, P. and N. R. Lee. 2007. ‘Marketing in the tor público’, Available from http://www.
Public Sector: The Final Frontier’. Public Man- esade.edu/public/modules.php?name=news&id
ager 36(1):12–7. new=578&idissue=47&newlang=spanish
Kosecik, M. and I. Sagbas. 2004. ‘Public Attitudes Peattie, S., K. Peattie and R. Thomas. 2012. ‘Social
to Local Government in Turkey: Research on Marketing as Transformational Marketing in Pub-
Knowledge, Satisfaction and Complaints’. Local lic Services: The Case of Project Bernie’. Public
Government Studies 30(3):360–383. Management Review 14(7):987–1010.
Kouzmin, A., E. Löffler, H. Klages and N. Porumbescu, G. A. 2017. ‘Does Transparency Im-
Korac-Kakabadse. 1999. ‘Benchmarking and Per- prove Citizens’ Perceptions of Government Per-
formance Measurement in Public Sectors: To- formance? Evidence From Seoul, South Ko-
wards Learning for Agency Effectiveness’. Inter- rea’. Administration and Society 49(3):443–
national Journal of Public Sector Management 468
12(2):121–144. Proctor, T. 2007. Public Sector Marketing. Harlow:
Lehtinen, U. and J. R. Lehtinen. 1982. Service Qual- Pearson Education.
ity: A Study of Quality Dimensions. Finland: Ser- Puig, T. 2004. Marketing de servicios para las ad-
vice Management Institute. ministraciones públicas con los ciudadanos. Red,
Mabey, C. and D. Skinner. 1998. ‘Empowerment claves y entusiastas. Sevilla: Junta de Andalucı́a.
in an Executive Agency? A Grass-Roots Assess- Puig, T., L. Rubio and A. Serra. 1999. ‘El mar-
ment of Strategic Intent’. International Journal of keting, el marketing de servicios públicos y
Public Sector Management 11(6):494–508. la gestión pública’ In ¿De burócratas a ger-
Mestre, M. S. 2012. ‘Aplicación de la investigación entes?’ In C. Losada (eds.), Las ciencias de
de mercados al análisis de problemas de market- la gestión aplicadas a la administración (pp.
ing’. Revista Icade. Revista de las Facultades de 114–115). Washington: Banco Interamericano de
Derecho y Ciencias Económicas y Empresariales Desarrollo.
(83–84):339–359. Rashid, M. H. 2008. ‘Measuring and achieving
Mintzberg, H. 1996. ‘Managing Government, Gov- quality customer service: a study on public sec-
erning Management’. Harvard Business Review tor in Malaysia’. Thesis. Rochester Institute of
74(3):75–83. Technology. Available from http://scholarworks.
Morley, K. and T. Vilkinas. 1997. ‘Public Sector rit.edu/theses/837/
Executive Development in Australia: 2000 and Rodriguez, G. 2012. ‘La calidad y la mejora en
Beyond’. International Journal of Public Sector la administración pública. España: AENOR -
Management 10(6):401–416. Asociación Española de Normalización y Cer-
Myers, R. L. 1996. ‘Consumer Satisfaction, Perfor- tificación’. Available from http://www.ebrary.
mance and Accountability in the Public Sector’. com
Review of Administrative Sciences 62(3):331– Sachdev, S. B. and H. V. Verma. 2004. ‘Relative Im-
350. portance of Service Quality Dimensions: A Mul-
Osbourne, D. and T. Gaebler. 1992. Re-Inventing tisectoral Study’. Journal of Services Research
Government: How the Entrepreneurial Spirit is 4(1):93–116.


C 2017 Institute of Public Administration Australia
12 Marketing Techniques in Public Administration xxxx 2017

Sahu, A. K. 2007. ‘Measuring Service Quality in University. Available from https://repository.

an Academic Library: An Indian Case Study’. mruni.eu/handle/007/14420
Library Review 56(3):234–243. Wæraas, A. 2015. ‘Making a Difference: Strate-
Saleh, F. and C. Ryan. 1991. ‘Analysing Service gic Positioning in Municipal Reputation Build-
Quality in the Hospitality Industry Using the ing’. Local Government Studies 41(2):280–
SERVQUAL Model’. Service Industries Journal 300.
11(3):324–345. Vasquez, M. 2006. Marketing social cor-
Santesmases, M. 2004. Marketing: conceptos y es- porativo. Colombia: Juan Carlos Martinez
trategias. Madrid: Pirámide. Coll.
Soliman, A. A. 1993. ‘Assessing the Quality of Zeithaml, V. A. 1988. ‘Consumer Perceptions of
Health Care: A Consumerist Approach’. Health Price, Quality, and Value: A Means-End Model
Marketing Quarterly 10(1–2):121–141. and Synthesis of Evidence’. Journal of Market-
Taylor, S. and T. Baker. 1994. ‘An Assessment of ing 52(3):2–22.
the Relationship Between of Customer Satisfac- Zeithaml, V. A., L. L. Parasuraman, A. V. Zeithaml,
tion in the Formation of Consumer’s Purchase In- A. Parasuraman and L. L. Berry. 1993. Cali-
tentions’. Journal of Retailing 70(2):163–178. dad total en la gestión de servicios: cómo lo-
Urvikis, M. 2016. ‘Vietos savivaldos institu- grar el equilibrio entre las percepciones y las ex-
cijų organizuojamų viešųjų paslaugų siste- pectativas de los consumidores. Madrid: Dı́az de
mos tobulinimas’. Thesis. Mykolas Romeris Santos.


C 2017 Institute of Public Administration Australia