Content uploaded by Lia Skarpeta
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Lia Skarpeta on Nov 08, 2020
Content may be subject to copyright.
Measuring internal service quality:
the case of the Greek public higher
education institutions
Kornilia Skarpeta
General Directorate of Technical Services and Computerization,
Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece
Maria Koemtzi
School of Science and Technology, Hellenic Open University, Patras, Greece, and
Dimitrios Aidonis
Department of Logistics, Technical Educational Institute of Central Macedonia,
Serres, Greece
Abstract
Purpose –The purpose of this paper is to investigate the idea of internal service quality in public
organizations. An attempt is made to determine the key elements that define the concept of internal service
quality and to identify the factors that support the attainment of high levels of internal quality. Internal
service quality refers to the quality of services offered between units and/or employees within an organization
and achieving internal quality in public authorities can contribute to the sustainability of the public sector.
Design/methodology/approach –A survey was conducted among administrative staff of the publicly
owned Greek Higher Education Institutions. The research instrument uses a three-level approach on internal
service quality: individual, departmental and organizational. The model was tested using exploratory and
confirmatory factor analysis.
Findings –Findings reveal a five-factor structure of internal service quality by adding the factors of
interdepartmental quality and the human aspect of internal service provision. Analysis of the data suggests
that internal service quality is dependent on the level of responsibility of the respondent’s job.
Research limitations/implications –There is evidence that the individual internal service quality factor
needs to be enhanced with more items. In addition, in order to gain generalizable results, further research
should be conducted in various types of public organizations.
Originality/value –This study examines a questionnaire that evaluates internal service quality and
proposes a basic five-factor model for estimating this type of service quality. It also triggers the use of internal
service quality theory within public sector organizations.
Keywords Service quality, Public organizations, Educational institutions, Internal quality
Paper type Case study
Introduction
Public sector organizations face unique business, cultural and strategic challenges.
Emerging trends in the external business environment such as the increase of global
competition, the liberalization of markets, the revolution of information technology and the
rise of the knowledge society, form a multifaceted background in which both public
organizations and public employees have to operate (Wright and Pandey, 2010). In order to
increase operational efficiency and to improve organization-to-citizen communication public
organizations have been forced to become modernized and to adopt practices from the
private sector (Pal and Ireland, 2009). They are under pressure to provide quality services
and at the same time to improve effectiveness (Robinson, 2003) by operating productively at
lower cost or increasing value for money by achieving better outcomes with no changes on
spending (Curristine et al., 2007).
The recent global financial crisis has stressed the importance of the quality of
governance on the financial performance of public sector (Mcnutt and Pal, 2011).
The TQM Journal
Vol. 32 No. 2, 2020
pp. 268-287
© Emerald Publishing Limited
1754-2731
DOI 10.1108/TQM-02-2019-0061
Received 27 February 2019
Revised 28 June 2019
Accepted 18 September 2019
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/1754-2731.htm
268
TQM
32,2
Public agencies shouldbe humanly, sustainably and socially oriented but they also have to
be cost effective (Pyun and Gamassou, 2018). The aim of installing better and faster
procedures in public sector was initiated by the idea of “public administration reform”
(Pollitt and Bouckaert, 2004) which formed the basis of the New Public Management (NPM)
theory and introduced several types of reorganization approaches. A fundamental idea
behind NPM is that public service providers should concentrate on efficient delivery of
quality services. Bearing in mind that the quality in the provision of services is highly
dependent upon the satisfaction of internal customers (Nagel and Cilliers, 1990), this paper
studies the internal service quality attitude of internal customers in public sector
organizations. An empirical research has been conducted in the Greek Higher Education
Institutions which, according to the Greek Constitution, are public organizations. The Greek
Government currently develops Action Plans setting quality goals and performance
indicators in public authorities (OECD, 2016). Greek Higher Education Institutions have
established by law a series of quality assurance evaluation processes in order to assess
the Institutions’teaching and research work, study programs and other services. This
research focus in the internal service quality of the administrative procedures of Higher
Education Institutions and it is an attempt to portray the perception of internal quality
concept by the administration staff of this segment of the Greek public sector.
Public sector reform and quality management
There has been a growing interest in implementing quality management in the public sector
(To et al., 2011) for achieving transparency, credibility and efficiency (Matei and Lazar, 2011).
Tomazevic et al. (2014) argue that public organizations adopting quality principles might easier
resolve difficulties and operate with lower cost and less effort and therefore, they propose the
use of quality approaches during financial crisis. On the other hand, according to Vakalopoulou
et al. (2013), effective implementation of quality principles is an opportunity to change employee
mentality, to improve citizens’life and to recover their perception of public services.
NPM reform has initiated a customer-oriented approach to public organizations enabling
citizens to express their requirements for the services they receive (Mwita, 2000; Schedler and
Proeller, 2000) and is harmonized with the quality management principles. NPM has been the
most dominant reform paradigm for over two decades and it has influenced the process
of change in all areas of public sector by emphasizing the decentralization, the devolution and
the modernization of public service delivery. The post-NPM era implied an increased focus on
integration and horizontal coordination in line with a governance approach and enhanced
political control and recentralization (Pollitt, 2003; Laegreid and Verhoest, 2010). In recent
years, many public administration reform initiatives have been launched in the
European countries. These initiatives were put in place either due to the financial crisis or
following regulations posed by the EU institutions or even came as a response to the pressures
of the citizens.
There is a strong connection between NPM and quality. This is stressed by Pollitt (2007)
who argues that NPM is a collection of concepts and practices, including among others, the
application of generic quality improvement techniques such as Total Quality Management
(TQM). In essence, the implementation of TQM in the public sector is associated with
the rise of NPM. They both share common aspects such as customer focus, performance
measurement, establishment of standards and targets, continuous improvement, employee
empowerment, culture change, etc. (Vinni, 2007). By its nature, NPM is linked with the TQM
practices, and the government bodies that follow the NPM principles usually advocate the
use of performance indicators, service dimensions, and quality tools and techniques that
originally adopted by the private sector organizations.
TQM as a means to achieve quality is adopted by private sector organizations in order to
increase efficiency, reduce costs and improve customer satisfaction (Antunes et al., 2009).
269
Measuring
internal service
quality
According to Evans and Dean (2000), any type of organization either large or small, either
from manufacturing or from service sector, profit or non-profit, they all can gain substantial
benefits by implementing the principles of TQM. Loeffler (2002) notes that a public agency
with a high-quality level should be able to increase customer satisfaction and at the same
time should build trust in public administration. For this reason, she recommends the
implementation of transparent procedures, accountability and democratic dialogue and she
uses the “democratic concept of quality”which identifies public organizations as catalysts
of civil society and citizens. However, the application of quality principles in public sector is
not an easy task and it depends on various factors. Wynen et al. (2016) for example have
found that the greater the degree of an organization’s autonomy, the higher the use of
quality management techniques whereas Fryer et al. (2007) state that the most important
critical success factor of TQM in the public sector is the management commitment.
In the EU countries, although it was initially planned to use quality management
practices in all levels of the public sector, public organizations have exhibited reduced
progress in the adoption of quality principles (Matei and Lazar, 2011). The main quality
management systems in use are those initiated by the European Foundation for Quality
Management, the Common Assessment Framework (CAF) and the ISO 9001 standard
(Bou-Lusar et al., 2008; Vernero et al., 2007; Magd and Curry, 2003) all of which may be used
in combination (Van Den Heuvel et al., 2005).
Internal customer and internal service quality
The term “internal customer”is based on the process view of the organizations where
organizational units such as departments, divisions, etc. provide services to an external
customer or to another unit. Employees of any service organization are the internal
customers in the service quality chain and Duževićet al. (2014) state that they are a very
important link in that chain. Chiang and Wu (2014) also note the importance of internal
customer in service industry by stating that meeting the needs of internal customers is a
prerequisite for the provision of high quality services to the final customer. Czepiel (1990)
argues that research on service quality should always include the views of both the provider
and the receiver of the service. Despite the significance of this dual perspective of service
quality only a limited number of researchers have examined the interactive features of it
(Tam and Wong, 2001; Chow-Chua and Komaran, 2002; Dedeke, 2003; Svensson, 2004, 2006)
whereas the majority of the service literature has focused on the service quality as perceived
by the customer (Parasuraman et al., 1988; Carman, 1990; Parasuraman et al., 1991; Babakus
and Boller, 1992; Cronin and Taylor, 1992; Babakus and Mangold, 1992; Guerrier and Deery,
1998). Customer satisfaction is a key factor in achieving organizational goals and also a
benchmark for performance excellence (Gerson, 1993; Munusamy and Chelliah, 2011) and in
conjunction with employee loyalty and commitment, has a large impact on the perceived
service quality (Beatson et al., 2008).
Establishing and maintaining a culture that emphasizes the well-being of internal customers
may serve as a means of attracting and retaining external customers. Jun and Cai (2010) argue
that it would be difficult for an organization to meet its clients’needs without taking into
consideration the expectations of its internal clients whereas Bansal et al. (2001) state that in the
service organizations, quality of service is integrated into quality and performance of human
resources. Internal clients’satisfaction mirrors satisfaction of external customers
(Reynoso, 1994) and when an organization satisfies its employees, it is likely to deliver
services of high quality to external customers (Chen and Kao, 2012).
Services delivered among employees are the internal services of an organization. More
specific, internal services are those provided by organizational units or people working in
these units to other units or employees within the organization (Strauss, 1995; Järvi, 2012).
Internal services are complex due to the variety of elements included in them and what is
270
TQM
32,2
finally perceived by an internal customer may only be a part of the overall internal service
process with many internal vendors and units (Braun and Hadwich, 2016). Although
scholars and managers agree on the importance of the complexity of internal services, the
concept still remains largely unexplored. Complexity of internal services affects the
coordination of activities of employees and business units (Tax et al., 2013) and it has been
argued that by reducing the complexity of the services, the perceived service quality may
increase (Easton and Pullman, 2001; Roels, 2014; Braun and Hadwich, 2017).
The term “internal service quality”is used to describe the quality of services delivered to
internal customers. The idea behind the concept of internal service quality is the extent of
satisfaction that is perceived by the employees (internal customers) when they get a service
from other units (internal suppliers) and in such a way that the service offered is optimal
( Johnston, 2008; Ehrhart et al., 2011). Basically, the quality of internal services is how
employees feel about the quality of services they receive from their colleagues (Xie, 2005).
Heskett et al. (2008) state that the quality of internal services refers to employees’attitudes
toward their jobs, their colleagues and the organization itself. The authors describe
workplace design, job design, employee selection and development, rewards and recognition
and tools for serving, as the key dimensions of “internal service quality.”According to
Lenka et al. (2010) work characteristics, reward and recognition systems, and supportive
administrative policies are essential elements for job satisfaction and research revealed that
there is a positive correlation between quality of internal services and job satisfaction
(Back et al., 2011; Conduit and Mavondo, 2001; Dauda et al., 2013; Ferdous and
Polonsky, 2014; Jyoti et al., 2017; Pantouvakis, 2011; Panjakajornsak, 2012; Jun and
Cai, 2010). Singh (2016) argues that an increased level of internal service quality can
stimulate higher levels of job performance while Xuan and Yunchen (2015) go further by
adding that internal service quality may affect service performance. When employees
receive quality services, this affects their job satisfaction, commitment and well-being
(Sharma et al., 2016) which in turn leads to increased efficiency, effectiveness and quality at
work and ultimately, to higher profits and reduced costs ( Jyoti et al., 2017).
Hallowell et al. (1996) identify eight components of the quality of internal services: tools;
teamwork; administration; training; reward/ recognition; goal alignment; policies/procedures;
and communication, whereas Xuan and Yunchen (2015) propose a six-dimensional approach:
management support; compensation; effective training; teamwork; communication; and
service facilities. Literature reveals a variety of internal service quality dimensions such as the
working environment (Hee Yoon et al., 2001; Davidson, 2003; Edvardsson and Gustavsson,
2003), the decision-making participation (Yagil, 2002; Heskett et al., 1997; Tschohl, 1998),
information and communication (Fletcher, 1999; Rudnick, 1996; Caruana and Pitt, 1997),
continuous improvement and cooperation (Jun and Cai, 2010), service costs, employee
responsibilities, safety and reliability of technology and finally, technology convenience
(Ganguli and Roy, 2013; Miguel-Davila, et al., 2010). Davis (2005) also adds the dimension of
ethics which imposed by the need for transparency in public sector.
Although it has been argued that the quality of internal services is a key factor that
contributes to the quality of the external service (Parente et al., 2002; Zeithaml et al., 2006;
Bellou and Andronikidis, 2008; Psomas et al., 2017), the studies published on the topic
mainly focus on external customer’s needs (Hallowell et al., 1996; Brady et al., 2002; Butcher
and Kayani, 2008; Stauss and Seidel, 2008; Raposo et al., 2009; Kumar et al., 2011) and less on
internal links between departments and services (Kang et al., 2002; Nooteboom, 2007;
Bouranta et al., 2009). Kuei (1999) points out that there is not enough empirical research to
evaluate service quality of internal services. Researchers measure the quality of the internal
service through the assessment of the external service quality, however the differences
between the two types of service is not taken into account (Yaoli, 2009). Although quality of
internal services shares common features with that of external services such as the barriers
271
Measuring
internal service
quality
that hinder improvements (i.e. inappropriate organizational culture, lack of customer focus,
lack of resources, lack of management commitment and support, etc.) ( Johnston, 2008) or the
need to be established as long-term goals (Kuei, 1999) they also differ substantially.
For example, Chen (2013) refers to the bureaucratic organizational culture and the
transformational leadership as those features that exert the greatest influence upon internal
service quality whereas Jun and Cai (2010) point out the need to develop new quality
dimensions that reflect the unique characteristics of the quality of internal services.
The Greek public higher education institutions
Higher education in Greece (also called post-secondary, third level or tertiary education) is
an optional final stage of the formal education system that occurs after completion of
secondary education. The Greek education system is under the central responsibility and
supervision of the Ministry of Education, Research and Religious Affairs (Eurydice, 2019a).
Greek Higher Education Institutions are self-governed Legal Entities under Public Law
i.e. they are regarded as public organizations; therefore, the members of their administrative
staff work as civil servants. The Greek parliament determines the laws and the government
determines regulations for higher education. The Greek higher education system consists of
two sectors: the university sector, which includes Universities, Polytechnics and the School
of Fine Arts; and the technological sector, which includes Technological Educational
Institutions and the Higher School of Pedagogical and Technological Education.
As public organizations, the Greek Higher Education Institutions demonstrate the
weaknesses of public sector. A major disadvantage and a common feature of Greek public
organizations according to Sigalas (1994) is increased centralization which causes
bureaucracy and limited managerial decisions. Extend bureaucracy, low productivity and
lack of measurement and control mechanisms are some of the reasons that Greek public
sector operates insufficiently (Rammata, 2011). In financial terms, according to OECD (2014),
bureaucracy of the public sector in Greece causes a loss of two percentage points of GDP
annually. At the same time the country is ranked in the last place among the EU countries in
reducing administrative burdens.
NPM in the Greek Public sector arrived relatively gradually. In the early 1980s the
government launched changes in order to reduce state control and later, in the 1990s,
reforms to reorganize public sector (Philippidou et al., 2004). In an effort to improve the
quality of services provided to the citizens the Greek state adopted a series of action plans in
public administration, introducing concepts such as Management by Objectives, efficiency
and effectiveness indicators and CAF. The endeavor however was mainly focused on
institutional rather than managerial reforms and for this reason it had low rate of
implementation (Spanou, 2008; Spanou and Sotiropoulos, 2011). The recent financial crisis
enforced the necessity for efficient and effective administration in the Greek public sector
indicating a need for a general restructuring and a fundamental transformation of public
authorities. For this reason, in recent years, the Greek Government developed an Action
Plan on Goal setting and Quality as part of the National Partnership Agreement 2014–2020
which involves implementation of quality goals and performance indicators and also
implementation of e-CAF (OECD, 2016).
As far as the public Greek education system is concerned, this can be described as highly
centralized, with central government exercising control on inputs into the system (European
Commission, 2018) with the economic crisis making the bureaucratic burden heavier
(Eurydice, 2019b). Greek education system is under a reform aiming among others, at
reducing bureaucracy and improving the operation of the whole system. The reform process
focuses on the principles of decentralized governance, transparency, quality assurance and
efficiency/ effectiveness (Eurydice, 2019b). Within the Higher Education segment, Greece
had to implement a series of reforms in order to comply with the Bologna Process core goals.
272
TQM
32,2
The aim of the qualitative upgrade of the Greek higher education system was introduced by
virtue of law 3374/2005. According to this law, quality assurance is implemented through
the Agency for Quality Assurance and Accreditation (ADIP). ADIP’s mission is to certify
both the internal system of quality assurance developed in Higher Education Institutions
and the study programs which are offered by academic units. Every Institution has also
established a Quality Assurance Unit (MODIP) which is responsible for the development
and operation of Institution’s internal quality assurance system (Eurydice, 2019b). Despite
these efforts, financial and staffing constraints both in the Higher Education Institutions
and in the quality assurance Agency had a negative effect in the expected results (European
Commission, 2018).
Research methodology
This study aims to investigate the perception of public-sector employees about the quality
of services delivered within the boundaries of their organization. Given the great
significance of the internal customer satisfaction in quality management theory and the
restricted empirical research on the matter, the main purpose of this study is to explore the
degree of application of internal quality aspects within a public service context. To illustrate
that, a research was conducted to measure the view of internal customers (i.e. employees) in
administrative services of the public Greek Universities. As already mentioned, the quality
concept in the Greek higher education system has been introduced through the attainment
of the Bologna process goals. Several studies have been published concerning quality in
public Higher Education Institutions in Greece but most of them deal with either the quality
of the educational services based on surveys conducted among students or focus on the
views of the members of one single institution (Zafiropoulos et al., 2005; Zafiropoulos and
Vrana, 2008; Trivellas and Dargenidou, 2009; Tsinidou et al., 2010; Dimas et al., 2011).
The current study investigates the internal service quality concept by exploring the views of
the administrative staff of the Greek Higher Education Institutions.
The measurement instrument of this empirical research is based on the internal service
quality questionnaire developed by Xie (2005). Xie’s research was also conducted within a
public organization and among others, her questionnaire explores factors that affect internal
service quality using the three-level approach described by Cook (2004): individual, team or
departmental and organizational service quality. Individual service quality refers to
employee-to-employee service provision, departmental covers the services provided
between departments, and organizational investigates the support of internal service
quality within the organizational boundaries (Xie, 2005). In order to better capture the
personnel’s influence on internal service quality, additional questions were used based on
the People Results criterion of CAF. The final questionnaire consisted of 30 statements
which measure the internal service quality by using a five-point Likert scale ranged from
1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). There were also six demographic variables
regarding the age, the sex, the educational level as well as postgraduate degree, the actual
job position of the respondent and working experience in public sector.
The population of the study were the administrative personnel of the Greek Higher
Education Institutions. The questionnaire was sent to 6,000 administrative employees of
36 Greek Higher Education Institutions via e-mail and a total of 467 usable responses were
received giving thus a response rate of 7.8 percent (Table I).
Data analysis
The responses were analyzed using SPSS 24. Descriptive statistics (Table II) revealed the
lowest mean value (M¼2.92) on the application of the principle of equality by the
organization’s HR management system whereas the highest mean value (M¼4.62) was
calculated for the relationships with collaborators in the same department. All mean score
273
Measuring
internal service
quality
values were above the median value (Mdn ¼3) indicating thus a high level of internal service
quality. Although this is not unexpected within a public context, it could be explained by the
fact that autonomy and self-government (authorities are elected by the currently employed
teaching staff) of the Greek Higher Education Institutions create a community background
that has on one hand the characteristics of the public sector, but at the same time it fosters
strong interpersonal and interdepartmental interactions. Furthermore, we believe that the
mandatory application of a quality assurance system in Greek education institutions has
promoted a growth of the quality concept in all aspects of their operations.
Before testing the effect of various parameters on response data, the validity and
reliability of the questionnaire were examined. The exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was
used to establish the construct validity of the data whereas the confirmatory factor analysis
(CFA) was conducted to address convergent and discriminant validity (Choi and Eboch,
1998). With regard to content validity which is a subjective evaluation concerning the
sufficient analysis of all aspects of the subject being measured, this study uses a
questionnaire which has been developed on the basis of literature investigation as well as of
a validated measurement instrument that had been previously used for similar research.
The simplest factor structure and the most interpretable results were calculated by
conducting EFA. The ratio of sample size to number of items of the questionnaire
Frequency Percentage
Sex
Male 341 73
Female 126 27
Total 467 100
Age (years)
Below 35 8 1.7
35 to 45 186 39.83
45 to 55 199 42.62
Above 55 74 15.85
Total 467 100
Working experience in public sector (in years)
Below 10 28 6
10 to 20 271 58
20 to 30 131 28
Above 30 37 8
Total 467 100
Educational level
Elementary 0 0
Secondary level 84 18
Technological institution 93 20
University 290 62
Total 467 100
Tertiary level
Yes 196 42
No 271 58
Total 467 100
High level of responsibility
Yes 168 36
No 299 64
Total 467 100
Table I.
Demographic data of
research participants
274
TQM
32,2
(467:30 ¼15.57) was well above the minimum 5:1 ratio suggested by Hair et al. (2006)
allowing us to proceed with the method. Data were factor analyzed following Principal
Components Analysis and promax rotation. KMO measure was 0.931 indicating that EFA
was suitable for the data. The Bartlett’s test of sphericity χ
2
¼7,407.6 ( po0.001) implied
that there were patterned relationships between the items and that the intercorrelation
matrix contained enough common variance to apply factor analysis. By using 1 as an
eigenvalue cut-off and after eliminating two items, the analysis showed that there were five
factors explaining the 62.63 percent of total variance which was also confirmed by the scree
plot. Significant factor criterion was set at 0.40 and factor loadings after rotation revealed a
five-factor model (Table III). Viewed in the context of the organization’s structural levels,
factor one seems to relate to the departmental aspects of the internal service quality whereas
factor two to the organizational aspects. Factor three reflects the individual perspective
while factor four the interdepartmental one. Finally, factor five is largely reflective of the
human dimension of the internal service provided and relates to the issue of
inter-organizational responsiveness.
The reliability of the five-factor model was tested by using the Cronbach’sαcoefficient.
Cronbach’sαfor each of the five factors as well as for the total scale (Table IV) were above the
threshold limit of 0.70suggestedbyHairet al. (2006). The coefficient for the “inter-organizational
responsiveness”factor is slightly lower (0.689) than the acceptable value which may be due to
the small number of questions describing the factor (Tavakol and Dennick, 2011).
The interfactor correlations were significant and ranged from 0.290 to 0.653 ( po0.001).
No. Question Count Mean SD
1 Work environment 467 3.72 0.96
2 Access to information and equipment 467 3.49 1.02
3 Comfort, hygiene and safety at work 467 3.05 1.13
4 Supervisor’s availability 467 3.98 1.13
5 Evenly distributed workload 467 3.21 1.20
6 Recognition for good service 467 3.31 1.15
7 Suggestions are taken into consideration 467 3.20 1.09
8 Principle of equality 467 2.92 1.32
9 Performing services right the first time 467 4.25 0.68
10 Knowledge and ability to answer questions 467 4.25 0.65
11 Training programs 467 2.96 1.11
12 Response to requests 467 4.37 0.65
13 Promising and delivering services on time 467 4.57 0.58
14 Understanding the needs of collaborators 467 4.25 0.70
15 Providing individual attention 467 4.24 0.72
16 Striving to solve internal problems quickly 467 4.46 0.73
17 Good relationships within departments 467 4.62 0.59
18 Treating other employees courteously 467 3.71 1.01
19 Organization’s support to personal problems 467 4.21 0.83
20 Department understands the needs of employees 467 4.22 0.79
21 Department promises and delivers services on time 467 3.38 0.91
22 Department responses quickly to requests 467 4.26 0.75
23 Departments provide high service quality 467 3.94 1.00
24 Department provides helpful services 467 3.78 1.02
25 Departmental and interdepartmental teamwork 467 3.40 1.16
26 Organization supports high internal service quality 467 3.07 1.18
27 Organization supports communication about internal service quality 467 3.12 1.12
28 Organization supports internal mechanisms for dialogue/communication 467 3.34 1.12
29 Organization establishes policies and procedures to serve customers better 467 3.72 0.96
30 Organization follows effective administrative procedures 467 3.49 1.02
Table II.
Descriptive statistics
of response data
275
Measuring
internal service
quality
Descriptive statistics and correlation matrix of the factors are presented in Table V which
shows that internal service quality has separate but correlated dimensions.
Having established the five dimensions of the scale, a CFA was conducted using AMOS 23
to test the goodness-of-fit for the proposed model which is graphically presented in Figure 1.
The results of the CFA are shown in Table VI. The indices show that the five-factor model has
an acceptable fit with the data ( χ
2
¼861.616, df ¼314, po0.001). χ
2
to degrees of freedom
ratios in the range of 2 to 1 or 3 to 1 areindicative of an acceptable fit between the hypothetical
model and the sample data (Carmines and McIver, 1981). Different researchers have
recommended using ratios as low as 2 or as high as 5 to indicate a reasonable fit
(Marsh and Hocevar, 1985).
Once the instrument was determined to be valid and reliable, correlation analysis was
used to examine the relationships among the five factors of the model. Spearman’sρand
Pearson’srcorrelation coefficients were calculated based on a two-tailed test and the
analysis revealed that all correlations between the factors were positive and significant at
0.01 level of significance (Table VII). The strongest correlation was detected between the
departmental factor of internal service quality and the factor of interorganizational
responsiveness (Spearman ρ: 0.715, Pearson r: 0.725) emphasizing thus the role of employee
awareness in the assessment of internal service quality of a department.
In addition, the effect of the demographic data of the respondents on internal service
quality factors was examined. A test of equality of means between independent groups was
Component
Question No. F1 F2 F3 F4 F5
02 0.889
01 0.831
06 0.702
03 0.695
04 0.689
05 0.652
07 0.582
11 0.540
08 0.520
27 0.992
28 0.892
26 0.820
29 0.743
30 0.637
25 0.507
10 0.771
09 0.755
12 0.670
13 0.560
14 0.499
21 0.953
22 0.947
24 0.670
23 0.572
20 0.475
17 0.823
18 0.790
16 0.418
Notes: Extraction method: principal component analysis; Rotation method: Promax with Kaiser Normal-
ization. Rotation converged in eight iterations
Table III.
Rotated factor matrix
276
TQM
32,2
conducted by using the demographic data of the respondents to define the groups. The null
hypothesis H
0
is that there is no statistically difference between the groups. Before
proceeding with the hypothesis test, a normality test was carried out at 95% confidence
interval using the Anderson-Darling test. The calculated p value was lower than 0.05
indicating a non-normal distribution of the data imposing thus the use of non-parametric
tests for the comparisons. The Mann Whitney test was used for two sampled populations
and the Kruskal Wallis test for three or more sampled populations. Table VIII presents the
cases where the null hypothesis H
0
is rejected and there are statistically significant
differences among the groups ( po0.05). More specifically, all internal quality assessment
factors differ statistically significantly with regard to the level of responsibility of
respondents’job position. Results indicate that employees that hold a position of higher
Factor Cronbach’sαNo. of items Item Cronbach’sαif item deleted
F1: Departmental internal service quality 0.889 9 Q01 0.873
Q02 0.876
Q03 0.885
Q04 0.880
Q05 0.877
Q06 0.872
Q07 0.875
Q08 0.873
Q11 0.879
F2: Organizational internal service quality 0.912 6 Q25 0.920
Q26 0.902
Q27 0.886
Q28 0.884
Q29 0.886
Q30 0.893
F3: Individual internal service quality 0.806 5 Q09 0.759
Q10 0.774
Q12 0.753
Q13 0.778
Q14 0.782
F4: Interdepartmental internal service quality 0.831 5 Q20 0.818
Q21 0.762
Q22 0.764
Q23 0.832
Q24 0.807
F5: Inter-organizational responsiveness 0.689 3 Q16 0.688
Q17 0.497
Q18 0.578
Table IV.
Cronbach’sα
coefficients of the
five-factor model
Component F1 F2 F3 F4 F5
F1 1.000 0.653 0.152 0.465 0.290
F2 0.653 1.000 0.181 0.507 0.382
F3 0.152 0.181 1.000 0.366 0.286
F4 0.465 0.507 0.366 1.000 0.509
F5 0.290 0.382 0.286 0.509 1.000
M3.3138 4.3388 4.4368 3.9567 3.4390
SD 0.82050 0.48983 0.53445 0.66508 0.91868
Note: Extraction method: principal component analysis; Rotation method: promax with Kaiser normalization
Table V.
Correlations, mean
scores and standard
deviations for the
five-factor model
277
Measuring
internal service
quality
responsibility tend to give higher scores on internal service quality variables comparing to
those who possess lower responsibility jobs. In addition, regarding the organizational aspect
of internal quality ( factor F2 of the final model) responses demonstrate a statistically
significant difference according to the respondents’educational level with those holding a
postgraduate degree to score lower on that internal quality aspect. Similarly, factors
VAR01
e9
F1
F2
F3
F4
F5
0.29
0.73
0.63
0.56
0.65
0.69
0.74
0.69
0.76
0.65
0.84
0.34
0.34
0.56
0.46
0.56
0.45
0.62
0.86
0.65
0.70
0.77
0.85
0.91
0.86
0.58
0.62
0.57
0.75
0.68
0.68
0.63
0.87
0.87
0.55
0.69
0.68
0.60
0.50
0.21
0.21
0.32
0.
0.34
0.37
0.39
0.34
e8
e7
e6
e5
e4
e3
e2
e1
e14
e13
e12
e11
e10
e29
e20
e19
e18
e17
e16
e25
e24
e23
e22
e21
e28
e27
e26
VAR02
VAR03
VAR04
VAR05
VAR06
VAR07
VAR08
VAR11
VAR26
VAR27
VAR28
VAR29
VAR30
VAR25
VAR09
VAR10
VAR12
VAR13
VAR14
VAR20
VAR21
VAR22
VAR23
VAR24
VAR16
VAR17
VAR18
Figure 1.
Structural model of
the study
χ
2
/df pNFI CFI RMSEA
2.744 0.000 0.880 0.920 0.061
Table VI.
Fit indices of the
construct model
278
TQM
32,2
F3 (individual), F4 (interdepartmental) and F5 (responsiveness) depend on the age of
respondents where the greater the age the higher the scores of the factors. Finally, factor
F4 is also dependent on the respondents’total time working experience in public sector with
those having longer period of employment give greater scores.
Concluding remarks
This study explores the implementation of the concept of internal service quality within the
boundaries of Greek public-sector organizations. The aim of the study is to use a
measurement instrument to investigate the application of internal quality aspects and to
uncover factors that describe and assess the level of application of internal quality concept
within a public organization. A research has been conducted among 36 Greek public Higher
Education Institutions using a measurement instrument based on the instrument developed
by Xie (2005). Questions adopted by the CAF model were added on Xie’s questionnaire in
order to have a broader understanding of the personnel’s attitude on internal service quality.
The analysis of the research data revealed a five-factor model to describe the quality of
internal services. These factors define a five-level structure of internal service quality
expanding thus the three-level approach proposed by Cook (2004). Cook’s model refers to the
individual, departmental and organizational levels of internal service quality whereas the
present study uncovers two more levels by adding the interdepartmental aspect which
signifies the internal service between departments and the “human”aspect of internal
service provision which explores the feature of inter-organizational responsiveness.
All mean factor values were above the median (Mdn ¼3) indicating thus a well-established
culture of internal service quality in the Greek Higher Education Institutions. This is mainly
F1 F2 F3 F4 F5
F1
Pearson correlation 1 0.303 0.329 0.563 0.725
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
Spearman’sρCoefficient 10.271 0.327 0.537 0.715
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
F2
Pearson correlation 0.303 1 0.572 0.513 0.319
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
Spearman’sρcoefficient 0.271 1 0.550 0.542 0.320
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
F3
Pearson correlation 0.329 0.572 1 0.486 0.382
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
Spearman’sρcoefficient 0.327 0.550 1 0.496 0.403
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
F4
Pearson correlation 0.563 0.513 0.486 1 0.589
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
Spearman’sρcoefficient 0.537 0.542 0.496 1 0.587
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
F5
Pearson correlation 0.725 0.319 0.382 0.589 1
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
Spearman’sρcoefficient 0.715 0.320 0.403 0.587 1
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
Table VII.
Correlations Pearson ‒
Spearman’sρ
279
Measuring
internal service
quality
due to the fact that quality assurance procedures have been put in place for a couple of years
in Greek Higher Education Institutions. The highest observed mean score was calculated for
the factor of the inter-organizational responsiveness (M¼4.437) followed by the factor of the
individual perspective of the quality of internal service (M¼4.339). Correlation analysis
revealed positive relationships between the factors and gave evidence of strong correlation
between the inter-organizational responsiveness and departmental service quality indicating
thus the significant role of employee responsiveness to the internal service quality assessment
of a department. It seems that responsiveness of the Higher Education Institutions staff is a
valuable asset which significantly affects the quality of the services delivered in the
departmental level. Increasing thus responsiveness by means of empowerment and education
could have a positive effect on the quality of internal services.
Findings from the non-parametric tests suggest that the variable that positively
determines the overall internal services quality perception by employees is the degree of
responsibility of their job position. Employees that hold a position of great responsibility
gave statistically higher scores on all factors implying thus a need for the management to
focus on the improvement of the service quality view of the staff from the lower levels of the
institution’s hierarchy. Some factors are reliant on the age, the education profile and the
working experience of the respondents indicating a need to enhance internal service quality
culture among younger, more educated and less experienced employees.
The study attempted to measure the basic parameters of the quality of internal services
in Greek Higher Education Institutions which are public organizations. Given the
complexity of the term of internal customer and the limited awareness on the principles of
Factors Demographic data nMedian p
F1 Departmental internal
service quality
High responsibility job position Yes 166 3.560 0.0012
No 301 3.330
F2 Organizational internal
service quality
Postgraduate degree Yes 194 3.330 0.0372
No 273 3.500
High responsibility job position Yes 166 3.670 0.0015
No 301 3.330
F3 Individual internal service quality Age Below 35 8 3.800 0.01
35 to 45 186 4.400
45 to 55 199 4.400
Above 55 74 4.400
High responsibility job position Yes 166 4.600 0.0000
No 301 4.200
F4 Inter-departmental internal
service quality
Age Below 35 8 3.100 0.003
35 to 45 186 4.000
45 to 55 199 4.000
Above 55 74 4.200
Working experience in public
sector
Below 10 28 3.700 0.02
10 to 20 269 4.000
20 to 30 131 4.000
Above 30 39 4.200
High responsibility job position Yes 166 4.200 0.0002
No 301 3.800
F5 Inter-organizational
responsiveness
Age Below 35 8 4.165 0.012
35 to 45 186 4.330
45 to 55 199 4.670
Above 55 74 4.670
High responsibility job position Yes 166 4.670 0.0009
No 301 4.330
Table VIII.
Demographic
data and factor
mean scores
280
TQM
32,2
quality management in the public sector, the present study contributes to the understanding
of employees’perception regarding the concepts of internal services and service quality.
It also portrays internal service quality of the administrative procedures of the Greek
Universities and the outcomes reveal a satisfactory level of internal service quality within
the institutions. Finally, the study is an attempt to assess previously developed models of
internal service quality and confirms the effectiveness of these models. Future research
could further examine the applicability of the proposed tool to measure the internal service
quality in a variety of settings (public or private organizations, service or manufacturing
enterprises, etc.).
Limitations of the research include the reliance on specific internal service quality
measures. There may be additional or alternative variables to describe the concept of
quality of internal services which may not have been taking into consideration. Further
investigation regarding the concept of internal service quality may reveal extra variables
that could describe the concept. Finally, as already mentioned research participants are civil
servants who work under the public sector laws and also under the requirements of an
established quality assurance system which means they are aware of basic quality concepts.
Therefore, the results of the study should be interpreted and generalizations should be made
with caution when considering other contexts. Future research may be done to explore the
view of internal service quality in other public service contexts with a different level of
quality maturity.
References
Antunes, G., Pires, A. and Machado, V. (2009), “Process improvement measures in social area
organisations: a study in institutions for elderly: survey results”,The TQM Journal, Vol. 21
No. 4, pp. 334-352.
Babakus, E. and Boller, G.W. (1992), “An empirical assessment of the SERVQUAL scale”,Journal of
Business Research, Vol. 24 No. 3, pp. 253-268.
Babakus, E. and Mangold, W.G. (1992), “Adapting the SERVQUAL scale to hospital services: an
empirical investigation”,Health Service Research, Vol. 26 No. 6, pp. 767-786.
Back, K.J., Lee, C.K. and Abbott, J. (2011), “Internal relationship marketing: Korean casino employees’
job satisfaction and organizational commitment”,Cornell Hospitality Quarterly, Vol. 52 No. 4,
pp. 111-124.
Bansal, H.S., Mendelson, M.B. and Sharma, B. (2001), “The impact of internal marketing activities on
external marketing outcomes”,Journal of Quality Management, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 61-76.
Beatson, A., Lings, I. and Gudergan, S. (2008), “Employee behavior and relationship quality: impact on
customers”,The Service Industries Journal, Vol. 28 No. 2, pp. 211-223.
Bellou, V. and Andronikidis, A. (2008), “The impact of internal service quality on customer service
behavior: evidence from the banking sector”,International Journal of Quality & Reliability
Management, Vol. 25 No. 9, pp. 943-954.
Bou-Lusar, J.C., Escrig-Tena, A.B., Roca-Puig, V. and Beltrán-Martin, I. (2008), “An empirical
assessment of the EFQM excellence model: evaluation as a TQM framework relative to the
MBNQA model”,Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 1-22.
Bouranta, N., Chitiris, L. and Paravantis, J. (2009), “The relationship between internal and external
service quality”,International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 21 No. 3,
pp. 275-293.
Brady, M.K., Cronin, J.J. and Brand, R.R. (2002), “Performance-only measurement of service quality:
a replication and extension”,Journal of Business Research, Vol. 55 No. 1, pp. 17-31.
Braun, C. and Hadwich, K. (2016), “Complexity of internal services: scale development and validation”,
Journal of Business Research, Vol. 69 No. 9, pp. 3508-3522.
281
Measuring
internal service
quality
Braun, C. and Hadwich, K. (2017), “Determinants of perceived internal service complexity: an empirical
analysis of promoting and limiting complexity factors”,European Business Review, Vol. 29 No. 1,
pp. 123-152.
Butcher, K. and Kayani, A. (2008), “Waiting for service: modelling the effectiveness of service
interventions”,Service Business, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 153-165.
Carman, J. (1990), “Consumer perceptions of service quality: an assessment of the SERVQUAL
dimensions”,Journal of Retailing, Vol. 66 No. 1, pp. 33-55.
Carmines, E.G. and McIver, J.P. (1981), “Analyzing models with unobserved variables”,in
Bohrnstedt, G.W. and Borgatta, E.F. (Eds), Social Measurement: Current Issues, Sage, Beverly
Hills, CA, pp. 65-115.
Caruana, A. and Pitt, L. (1997), “INTQUAL –an internal measure of service quality and link between
service quality and business performance”,European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 31 No. 8,
pp. 604-616.
Chen, C.F. and Kao, Y.L. (2012), “Investigating the antecedents and consequences of burnout and
isolation among flight attendants”,Tourism Management, Vol. 33 No. 4, pp. 868-874.
Chen, W.J. (2013), “Factors influencing internal service quality at international tourist hotels”,
International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 35 No. 1, pp. 152-160.
Chiang, C.F. and Wu, K.P. (2014), “The influences of internal service quality and job standardization on
job satisfaction with supports as mediators: flight attendants at branch workplace”,
The International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 25 No. 19, pp. 2644-2666.
Choi, T.Y. and Eboch, K. (1998), “The TQM paradox: relations among TQM practices, plant
performance, and customer satisfaction”,Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 17 No. 1,
pp. 59-75.
Chow-Chua, C. and Komaran, R. (2002), “Managing service quality by combining voice of the service
provider and voice of their customers”,Managing Service Quality, Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 77-86.
Conduit, J. and Mavondo, F.T. (2001), “How critical is internal customer orientation to market
orientation?”,Journal of Business Research, Vol. 51 No. 1, pp. 11-24.
Cook, S. (2004), Measuring Customer Service Effectiveness, Gower Publishing Company, Burlington, VT.
Cronin, J.J. and Taylor, S.A. (1992), “Measuring service quality –a reexamination and extension”,
Journal of Marketing, Vol. 56 No. 3, pp. 55-68.
Curristine, T., Lonti, Z. and Joumard, I. (2007), “Improving public sector efficiency: challenges and
opportunities”,OECD Journal on Budgeting, Vol. 7 No. 1.
Czepiel, J.A. (1990), “Service encounters and service relationships: implications for research”,Journal of
Business Research, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 13-21.
Dauda, A., Maishanu, M.M. and Mawoli, M.A. (2013), “Effect of internal service quality on employee job
satisfaction: evidence from Abubakar Gimba Library, IBB University, Lapai –Nigeria”,
American International Journal of Contemporary Research, Vol. 3 No. 6, pp. 88-96.
Davidson, M.C.G. (2003), “Does organizational climate adds to service quality in hotels?”,International
Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 206-213.
Davis, P.J. (2005), “In search of the common wealth: a service-profit chain for the public sector”,
International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 55 No. 2, pp. 163-172.
Dedeke, A. (2003), “Service quality: a fulfillment-oriented and interactions-centered approach”,
Managing Service Quality, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 276-289.
Dimas, G.A., Goula, A. and Pierrakos, G. (2011), “Quality issues in higher education: a multicriteria
framework of satisfaction measures”,Creative Education, Vol. 2 No. 3, p. 305.
Dužević, I., Baković, T. and Štulec, I. (2014), “Exploring the possibilities for quality improvement: an
internal customer perspective”,Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, Vol. 5 No. 13, pp. 29-35.
Easton, F.F. and Pullman, M.E. (2001), “Optimizing service attributes: the seller’s utility problem”,
Decision Sciences, Vol. 32 No. 2, pp. 251-276.
282
TQM
32,2
Edvardsson, B. and Gustavsson, B.O. (2003), “Quality in the work environment: a pre-requisite for
success in services development”,Managing Service Quality, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 148-163.
Ehrhart, K.H., Witt, L.A., Schneider, B. and Perry, S.J. (2011), “Service employees give as they get:
internal service as a moderator of the service climate-service outcomes link”,Journal of Applied
Psychology, Vol. 96 No. 2, pp. 423-431.
European Commission (2018), “Study to evaluate the progress on quality assurance systems in the area of
higher education in the Member States and on cooperation activities at European level: final
report”, Directorate-General for Education, Youth, Sport and Culture, Higher Education Brussels.
Eurydice (2019a), “Greece: ongoing reforms and policy developments”, February, available at: https://
eacea.ec.europa.eu/national-policies/eurydice/ (accessed August 1, 2019).
Eurydice (2019b), “Greece: quality assurance in higher education”, June, available at: https://eacea.ec.
europa.eu/national-policies/eurydice/ (accessed August 1, 2019).
Evans, J.R. and Dean, J.W. (2000), Total Quality: Management, Organization and Strategy,
South-Western College Publishing, Cincinnati, OH.
Ferdous, A.S. and Polonsky, M. (2014), “The impact of frontline employees’perception of internal
marketing on employee outcomes”,Journal of Strategic Marketing, Vol. 22 No. 4, pp. 300-315.
Fletcher, M. (1999), “The effect of internal communication and team performance on successful service
quality implementation: a South African perspective”,Performance Management, Vol. 5 No. 5,
pp. 150-163.
Fryer, K.J., Antony, J. and Douglas, A. (2007), “Critical success factors of continuous improvement in
the public sector: a literature review and some key findings”,The TQM Magazine, Vol. 19 No. 5,
pp. 497-517.
Ganguli, S. and Roy, S.K. (2013), “Conceptualization of service quality for hybrid services: a hierarchical
approach”,Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, Vol. 24 Nos 9-10, pp. 1202-1218.
Gerson, R.F. (1993), Measurement Customer Satisfaction, Crisp Publication Inc., Menlo Park, CA.
Guerrier, Y. and Deery, M. (1998), “Research in hospitality management and organizational behavior”,
International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 145-160.
Hair, J.F. Jr, Blacj, W.C., Babin, B.J., Anderson, R.E. and Tatham, R.L. (2006), Multivariate Data Analysis,
6th ed., Pearson Prentice Hall, NJ.
Hallowell, R., Schlesinger, L.A. and Zornitsky, J. (1996), “Internal service quality, customer, and job
satisfaction: linkages and implications for management”,Human Resource Planning, Vol. 19
No. 2, pp. 20-31.
Hee Yoon, M., Beatty, S.E. and Suh, J. (2001), “The effect of work climateon critical employee andcustomer
outcome”,International Journal of Service Industry Management, Vol. 12 No. 5, pp. 500-521.
Heskett, J.L., Sasser, W.E. and Schlesinger, L.A. (1997), The Service-profit Chain: How Leading
Companies Link Profit and Growth to Loyalty, Satisfaction and Value, Free Press, New York, NY.
Heskett, J.L., Jones, T.O., Loveman, G.W., Sasser, E.W. and Schlesinger, L.A. (2008), “Putting the
service-profit chain to work”,Harvard Business Review, Vol. 72 No. 2, pp. 118-129.
Järvi, S. (2012), “Developing the internal service quality in organisation Y”, Bachelor’s thesis, Laurea
University of Applied Sciences, Laurea Leppävaara.
Johnston, R. (2008), “Internal service –barriers, flows and assessment”,International Journal of Service
Industry Management, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 210-231.
Jun, M. and Cai, S. (2010), “Examining the relationships between internal service quality and its
dimensions, and internal customer satisfaction”,Total Quality Management & Business
Excellence, Vol. 21 No. 2, pp. 205-223.
Jyoti, J., Kour, S. and Sharma, J. (2017), “Impact of total quality services on financial performance: role of
service profit chain”,Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, Vol. 28 Nos 7-8,
pp. 897-929.
283
Measuring
internal service
quality
Kang, G.D., James, J. and Alexandris, K. (2002), “Measurement of internal service quality: application of the
SERVQUAL battery to internal service quality”,Managing Service Quality, Vol. 12 No. 5, pp. 278-291.
Kuei, C.H. (1999), “Internal service quality –an empirical assessment”,International Journal of Quality
& Reliability Management, Vol. 16 No. 8, pp. 783-791.
Kumar, P., Dass, M. and Topaloglu, O. (2011), “Exploring satisfaction in business-to-business services:
a path analytic approach”,Service Business, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 13-27.
Laegreid, P. and Verhoest, K. (Eds) (2010), Governance of Public Sector Organizations. Proliferation,
Autonomy and Performance, Palgrave Macmillan, London.
Lenka, U., Suar, D. and Mohapatra, P.K.J. (2010), “Customer satisfaction in Indian commercial banks
through total quality management approach”,Total Quality Management, Vol. 21 No. 12,
pp. 1315-1341.
Loeffler, E. (2002), “Defining and measuring quality in public administration”, in Caddy, J. and
Mirko, V. (Eds), Building Better Quality Administration for the Public: Case Studies from Central
and Eastern Europe, NISPAcee, Bratislava, pp. 15-34.
Mcnutt, K. and Pal, L. (2011), “Modernizing government: mapping global public policy networks”,
Governance, Vol. 24 No. 3, pp. 439-467.
Magd, H. and Curry, A. (2003), “ISO 9000 and TQM: are they complementary or contradictory to each
other?”,The TQM Magazine, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 244-256.
Marsh, H.W. and Hocevar, D. (1985), “Application of confirmatory factor analysis to the study of
self-concept: first- and higher-order factor models and their invariance across groups”,
Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 97 No. 3, pp. 562-582.
Matei, L. and Lazar, C.G. (2011), “Quality management and the reform of public administration in
several states in South-Eastern Europe: comparative analysis”,Theoretical and Applied
Economics, Vol. 18 No. 4, pp. 65-98.
Miguel-Davila, J.A., Cabeza-Garcıa, L., Valdunciel, L. and Florez, M. (2010), “Operations in banking: the
service quality and effects on satisfaction and loyalty”,The Service Industries Journal, Vol. 30
No. 13, pp. 2163-2182.
Munusamy, J. and Chelliah, S. (2011), “An investigation of impact of service strategy on customer
satisfaction in the budget airline industry in Malaysia: a case study of air Asia”,Contemporary
Marketing Review, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 1-13.
Mwita, J.I. (2000), “Performance management model”,The International Journal of Public Sector
Management, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 19-37.
Nagel, P.J. and Cilliers, W.W. (1990), “Customer satisfaction: a comprehensive approach”,International
Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 20 No. 6, pp. 2-46.
Nooteboom, B. (2007), “Service value chains and effects of scale”,Service Business, Vol. 1 No. 2,
pp. 119-139.
OECD (2014), Measurement and Reduction of Administrative Burdens in Greece: An Overview of 13
Sectors, OECD Publishing.
OECD (2016), The Governance of Inclusive Growth: An Overview of Country Initiatives, OECD
Publishing, Paris.
Pal, L.A. and Ireland, D. (2009), “The public-sector reform movement: mapping the global policy
network”,International Journal of Public Administration, Vol. 32 No. 8, pp. 621-657.
Panjakajornsak, V. (2012), “Applying the service profit chain to a private hospital in Thailand”,NIDA
Development Journal, Vol. 49 No. 2, pp. 79-108.
Pantouvakis, A. (2011), “Internal service quality and job satisfaction synergies for performance
improvement: some evidence from a B2B environment”,Journal of Targeting, Measurement and
Analysis for Marketing, Vol. 19 No. 1, pp. 11-22.
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V.A. and Berry, L.L. (1988), “SERVQUAL: a multiple-item scale for
measuring consumer perceptions of service quality”,Journal of Retailing, Vol. 64 No. 1, pp. 12-40.
284
TQM
32,2
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V.A. and Berry, L.L. (1991), “Refinement and reassessment of the
SERVQUAL scale”,Journal of Retailing, Vol. 67 No. 4, pp. 420-450.
Parente, D.H., Pegels, C.C. and Suresh, N. (2002), “An exploratory study of the sales-production
relationship and customer satisfaction”,International Journal of Operations & Production
Management, Vol. 22 No. 9, pp. 997-1013.
Philippidou, S.S., Soderquist, K.E. and Prastacos, G.P. (2004), “Towards new public management in
Greek public organizations: leadership vs management, and the path to implementation”,Public
Organization Review, Vol. 4 No. 4, pp. 317-337.
Pollitt, C. (2003), The Essential Public Manager, Open University, Maidenhead.
Pollitt, C. (2007), “The new public management: an overview of its current status”,Administratie si
Management Public, Vol. 8, pp. 110-115.
Pollitt, C. and Bouckaert, G. (2004), Public Management Reform: A Comparative Analysis, 2nd ed.,
Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Psomas, E., Vouzas, F., Bouranta, N. and Tasiou, M. (2017), “Effects of total quality management in
local authorities”,International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 41-66.
Pyun, H. and Gamassou, C.E. (2018), “Looking for public administration theories?”,Public Organization
Review, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 245-261.
Rammata, M. (2011), Modern Greek Public Administration: Between Bureaucracy and Management
(in Greek), Kritiki Publications, Athens.
Raposo, M.L., Alves, H.M. and Duarte, P.A. (2009), “Dimensions of service quality and satisfaction in
healthcare: a patient’s satisfaction index”,Service Business, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 85-100.
Reynoso, J. (1994), “Development of a multiple-item scale for measuring internal service quality in
hospitals”, paper presented at the 3rd International Seminar on Service Management and
Marketing, Aix-en-Provence, May 24-27.
Robinson, L. (2003), “Committed to quality: the use of quality schemes in UK public leisure services”,
Managing Service Quality, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 247-255.
Roels, G. (2014), “Optimal design of coproductive services: interaction and work allocation”,
Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, Vol. 16 No. 4, pp. 578-594.
Rudnick, M. (1996), “Employee communications: how technology impacts on practice”,Managing
Service Quality: An International Journal, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 45-48.
Schedler, K. and Proeller, I. (2000), New Public Management, Haupt, Bern and Stuttgart and Wien.
Sharma, P., Kong, T.C.T. and Kingshott, R.P.J. (2016), “Internal service quality as a driver of employee
satisfaction, commitment and performance: exploring the focal role of employee well-being”,
Journal of Service Management, Vol. 27 No. 5, pp. 773-797.
Sigalas, I. (1994), “Current organizational and managerial reality of Greek hospitals”,Epitheorisi
Ygeias, Vol. 5, pp. 21-22.
Singh, K. (2016), “Influence of internal service quality on job performance: a case study of royal police
department”,Procedia –Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 224, pp. 28-34.
Spanou, C. (2008), “State reform in Greece: responding to old and new challenges”,The International
Journal of Public Sector Management, Vol. 21 No. 2, pp. 150-173.
Spanou, C. and Sotiropoulos, D. (2011), “The odyssey of administrative reform in Greece, 1981-2009:
a tale of two reform paths”,Public Administration, Vol. 89 No. 3, pp. 723-737.
Strauss, B. (1995), “Internal services: classification and quality management”,Journal of Service
Industry Management, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 62-78.
Stauss, B. and Seidel, W. (2008), “Discovering the ‘customer annoyance iceberg’through evidence
controlling”,Service Business, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 33-45.
Svensson, G. (2004), “A customized construct of sequential service quality in service encounter chains:
time, context, and performance threshold”,Managing Service Quality, Vol. 14 No. 6, pp. 468-475.
285
Measuring
internal service
quality
Svensson, G. (2006), “New aspects of research into service encounters and service quality”,
International Journal of Service Industry Management, Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 245-257.
Tam, J.L.M. and Wong, Y.H. (2001), “Interactive selling: a dynamic framework for services”,Journal of
Services Marketing, Vol. 15 No. 5, pp. 379-396.
Tavakol, M. and Dennick, R. (2011), “Making sense of Cronbach’s alpha”,International Journal of
Medical Education, Vol. 2, pp. 53-55.
Tax, S.S., McCutcheon, D. and Wilkinson, I.F. (2013), “The service delivery network (SDN) a customer-
centric perspective of the customer journey”,Journal of Service Research, Vol. 16 No. 4,
pp. 454-470.
To, W.M., Lee, P.K.C. and Yu, B.T.W. (2011), “ISO 9001:2000 implementation in the public sector: a
survey in Macao SAR, the People’s Republic of China”,The TQM Journal, Vol. 23 No. 1,
pp. 59-72.
Tomazevic, N., Seljak, J. and Aristovnik, A. (2014), “The impact of CAF enablers on job satisfaction: the
case of the Slovenian Law Enforcement Agency”,Total Quality Management & Business
Excellence, Vol. 25 Nos 11-12, pp. 1336-1351.
Trivellas, P. and Dargenidou, D. (2009), “Organisational culture, job satisfaction and higher education
service quality: the case of Technological Educational Institute of Larissa”,The TQM Journal,
Vol. 21 No. 4, pp. 382-399.
Tschohl, J. (1998), “Empowerment - the key to quality service”,Managing Service Quality, Vol. 8 No. 6,
pp. 421-425.
Tsinidou, M., Gerogiannis, V. and Fitsilis, P. (2010), “Evaluation of the factors that determine quality in
higher education: an empirical study”,Quality Assurance in Education, Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 227-244.
Vakalopoulou, M., Tsiotras, G. and Gotzamani, K. (2013), “Implementing CAF in public administration
Best practices in Europe –obstacles and challenges”,Benchmarking: An International Journal,
Vol. 20 No. 6, pp. 744-764.
Van Den Heuvel, J., Koning, L., Bogers, A.J., Berg, M. and van Dijen, M.E. (2005), “An ISO 9001 quality
management system in a hospital: bureaucracy or just benefits?”,International Journal of Health
Care Quality Assurance, Vol. 18 No. 5, pp. 361-369.
Vernero, S., Nabitz, U., Bragonzi, G., Rebelli, A. and Molinari, R. (2007), “A two level EFQM
self-assessment in an Italian hospital”,International Journal of Health Care Quality Assurance,
Vol. 20 No. 3, pp. 215-231.
Vinni, R. (2007), “Total quality management and paradigms of public administration”,International
Public Management Review, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 103-128.
Wright, B.E. and Pandey, S.K. (2010), “Public organizations and mission valence: when does mission
matter?”,Administration & Society, Vol. 43 No. 1, pp. 22-44.
Wynen, J., Verhoest, K. and Demuzere, S. (2016), “Quality management in public-sector organizations:
evidence from six EU countries”,International Journal of Public Administration, Vol. 39 No. 2,
pp. 122-134.
Xie, D. (2005), “Exploring organizational learning culture, job satisfaction, motivation to learn,
organizational commitment, and internal service quality in a sport organization”, doctoral
dissertation, The Ohio State University, Columbus.
Xuan, Y. and Yunchen, W. (2015), “The impact of commercial banks’internal service quality on the
front-line employees’service performance: based on the perspective of internal marketing”,
International Conference on Service Science (ICSS), IEEE Conference Publications, pp. 70-74.
Yagil, D. (2002), “The relationship of customer satisfaction and service workers’perceived control”,
International Journal of Service Industry Management, Vol. 13 No. 4, pp. 382-398.
Yaoli, C. (2009), “A design of the internal service quality evaluation system in China”, Computing,
Communication, Control, and Management, CCCM 2009, ISECS International Colloquium, IEEE,
Vol. 2, pp. 471-473.
286
TQM
32,2
Zafiropoulos, C. and Vrana, V. (2008), “Service quality assessment in a Greek higher education
institute”,Journal of Business Economics and Management, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 33-45.
Zafiropoulos, C., Fragidis, G., Kehris, E., Dimitriadis, S. and Paschaloudis, D. (2005), “Service quality
assessment in higher education, the case of Technological Educational Institute (TEI) of Serres,
Greece”,9th International Conference on Marketing and Development: Marketing Contributions
to Prosperity and Peace,June, pp. 8-11.
Zeithaml, V.A., Bitner, M.J. and Gremler, D.D. (2006), Services Marketing: Integrating Customer Focus
across the Firm, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Corresponding author
Kornilia Skarpeta can be contacted at: kskarpet@auth.gr
For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
287
Measuring
internal service
quality
