Content uploaded by Krishna kistan Govender
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Krishna kistan Govender on May 16, 2016
Content may be subject to copyright.
839
Theme: Theory & Practice
PROPOSING A MODEL FOR MANAGING
SERVICE QUALITY IN THE FINANCIAL
SERVICES INDUSTRY
Krishna K Govender
University of Transkei
Address for all correspondence:
Krishna K Govender
Department of Business Management
Faculty of Economic & Management Sciences
University of Transkei
Private Bag X1, UNITRA,
Umtata, 5117 Eastern Cape
South Africa
Phone: 0471 3022577(0), 311594 (H), Cell 0822007422
Fax: 0471 26820
E-mail: govender@getafix.utr.ac.za
840
PROPOSING A MODEL FOR MANAGING
SERVICE QUALITY IN THE FINANCIAL
SERVICES INDUSTRY
ABSTRACT
Since service customers often take on the role of 'partial' employees during the
service encounter, it is important for the service organization to devise strategies
to manage not only their full-time employees but also their 'partial'
employees/customers.
It is proposed that bank managers could improve service quality by effectively
socializing its employees and customers by inter-alia, formal and informal tactics.
The proposed effects of formal and informal socialization tactics on the bank
employees’ and customers’ perception of overall service quality and employee
service quality are postulated in a conceptual model.
841
INTRODUCTION
Recent years have witnessed increased emphasis on service quality issues (Ostrom
and Iacobucci 1995), and as aptly reviewed in a recent article (Yavas, Arsan and
Dilber 1995), a great deal of attention in the area has focused on the financial
services industry. This focus on the financial services industry is not without
reason. The banking environment is becoming increasingly competitive and in the
context of deregulated financial markets, customers of banks are increasingly able
and willing to shop around for financial services which best meet their
expectations.
Furthermore, the products offered are essentially the same, and the cost structure
amongst most banks is also quite equal. The products can also be copied easily
and quickly, so competition based on innovation will be difficult and will be even
more so in the future (Edvardsson, Thomasson and Ovretveit 1994). Since the
customer's perception of a bank's "product" is affected more by the services
associated with it than by the physical product itself, by stressing certain aspects
of its service(s), each bank could create a form of uniqueness in the marketplace.
Researchers (Rust and Zahorik 1993; Anderson, Forwell and Lehman 1994) agree
that quality influences variables such as profitability and market share.
However, simply believing in the importance of providing excellent service
quality is not enough. Managers who are truly dedicated to service quality must
put in motion a continuous process for: monitoring customers’ perceptions of
service quality, identifying the causes of service-quality shortfalls, and taking
appropriate action to improve quality. In an attempt to address the
aforementioned, the purpose of this paper is to:
• briefly review the literature on service quality and to critique some service
quality models,
• propose a conceptual model for managing bank service quality and postulate
relationships among the variables in the proposed model.
A THEORETICAL REVIEW
Service Quality
Early researchers who have addressed the issue of service quality, inter alia,
(Parasuraman , Zeithaml and Berry 1985; Gronroos 1983) seem to agree on at
least one critical issue: service quality is a measure of the discrepancy between
consumers' pre-service delivery expectations and actual service delivery.
However, recently researchers (Cronin and Taylor 1994; Teas, 1994; Buttle 1996)
have questioned "expectations" as a standard of measuring service quality.
842
Despite the debate on the relevance of "expectations" as a measure of service
quality, the question of what factors influence consumers' quality perceptions has
become a key consideration in any attempt to successfully introduce and improve
quality. While defining service quality as the "delivery of excellent or superior
service relative to customer perceptions", Zeithaml and Bitner (1996) emphasize
that ultimately consumers judge the quality of services on their perceptions of the
technical outcome provided, and on how the outcome was delivered.
In their attempts to better define service quality, some researchers (Parasuraman et
al.1985; Schneider, Parkington and Buxton 1980) have identified various
dimensions or determinants of service quality. For example, Schneider et al.
(1980) ascertained that with reference to bank customers, service quality was
judged along the following dimensions: teller courtesy, officer courtesy, teller
competence, adequate staff, branch administration, handling services,
convenience, employee turnover, selling, and employee attitudes. On the other
hand, Parasuraman, Berry and Zeithaml (1988) identified five dimensions which
could best define service quality, namely tangibility, reliability, responsiveness,
assurance and empathy. Considering the importance of people to the delivery of
service quality, it is not surprising that the aforementioned were found to be the
most important determinants of perceived service quality.
Bergman and Klefsjo (1994) conclude that much of service quality is related to
moments when the service supplier and the customer meet face to face. This
moment, which is often referred to as the "moment of truth", is also a "moment of
possibilities”, since the supplier can really convince the customer of service
excellence. According to Bergman and Klefsjo (1994, p. 267), the perfect system
for delivering service is worthless if things do not work at the moments of truth.
In view of the aforementioned, it would seem that, when evaluating service
quality the consumer considers the service delivery process as well as the service
outcome. With reference to the delivery process, the importance of the service
delivery personnel is highlighted. However, no reference to the role of the service
customer in the service delivery process has been made. This paper attempts to
address this very issue.
Managing Service Quality
Managing service quality is one of the greatest challenges facing virtually every
organization whether it is delivering a "pure service" or it is a manufacturing
company needing to fully support its customers.
Edvardsson et al. (1994) cite Ovretveit (1992) who maintains that managing
quality in services depends on getting the right balance between techniques and
methods for improving processes and systems, and staff attitudes, behaviour and
service culture.
843
Some researchers (Levitt 1972; Chase 1978) suggested the production-line or
"technocratic" approach to the provision of services, and recommended that
people be systematically replaced by equipment in order to remove discretion
from the service employees job. Furthermore, Lovelock and Young (1979), by
adopting a “technological” approach argued that service productivity has
traditionally been improved in three different ways: by improving the quality of
the labour force, by investing in more efficient capital equipment, and by
incorporating technologies which automate service provision functions formerly
performed by service personnel.
However, while an industrialization approach to services, as suggested by some
researchers (Levitt 1972; Lovelock and Young 1979) may seem appealing
initially, by relying upon the industrial management techniques the service
marketer or manager is in danger of eliminating the customer orientation which is
so vital during the interactive employee-customer service encounter.
Rather than encouraging a strictly technological approach to improving service
quality as Levitt (1976), Chase (1978) and Lovelock and Young (1979) have
done, Berry (1986, p. 6-8) suggested that a "high touch" approach to services be
implemented in conjunction with the "high tech" approach; thus implying an
important role for service employees.
Researchers (Schneider and Bowen 1995; Wikstrom 1996) have also argued that
it is possible to improve service productivity by changing consumer behaviour
and expectations. By allowing the customer to participate in the service
production process, service managers could improve the productivity of their
operations. Furthermore, Silpakit and Fisk (1985, p.117) assert that customer
"participation" rather than customer "contact" emphasizes the active role
consumers play in the service encounter. For example, employee-customer
contact is non-existent when a customer conducts a banking transaction with an
automatic teller machine [henceforth ATM]; however, in this transaction there is a
great deal of customer participation. The situation could be reversed should the
customer experience problems with the ATM.
Several researchers (Langeard, Bateson, Lovelock and Eiglier 1981, as cited by
Kelley, Skinner and Donnelly 1992, p. 316) have empirically assessed the
participatory role of consumers in the service provision process. Their findings
indicate that there are substantial, identifiable and managerially useful market
segments of service consumers that are willing to participate in the service
provision process. However, these researchers concur that consumers differ in
their degree of willingness to participate in the service encounter.
It is apparent from the above, that the employee-customer interaction is a very
important aspect of the service encounter, and that the service customer could
play an important participatory role in the service provision process. It would
seem that advocates of the "technological" approach to the management of service
844
performance and quality have ignored an important factor, namely, the level of
sophistication achieved by the customer or target market.
For example, if a bank operates in an area in which the majority of customers are
illiterate or have achieved a low level of education, there is need for more
personal interaction between bank employees and customers to conclude most
transactions. Serving a semi-literate segment is bound to result in many queries
emanating from a lack of knowledge about or incorrect use of ATM's. By
interacting with customers and responding to queries, bank employees are
provided with "opportunities" to impress these customers.
In their attempts to both explain the concept service quality and also manage
service quality, some researchers such as Gronroos (1984), Parasuraman et al.
(1985), Lehtinen and Lehtinen (1985), Gummesson and Gronroos (1987), Le
Blanc and Nguyen (1988) have proposed various models. A brief discussion of
some of the more important models follows.
A Brief Review of some Service Quality Models
Gronroos (1984) postulated that service quality is dependent upon the service
which the customer expects and the perceived service. The experienced quality
consists of two dimensions, namely technical quality and functional quality.
Technical quality refers to the technical ability or know how that a company
possesses; it is an objective assessment [the "What"] comprising such issues as
technical solutions, machines, computerized systems and know how.
Functional quality [the "How"] is a subjective assessment comprising attitudes,
internal relations, behaviour, service mindedness, appearance, accessibility and
customer contacts. Gronroos (1984) maintained that technical quality could be
improved by improving the technical skills of service personnel or by the
increased use of modern technology, and functional quality could be improved by
ensuring satisfying service encounters and maintaining good interpersonal
relations.
In service businesses, the consumer is not only interested in "what" he receives as
an outcome of the production process, but in the process itself. "How" he gets the
technical outcome or technical quality is also important to him and to his view of
the service he has received. This view has received recent empirical support
(Ennew, Reed and Martin 1993; Cronin and Taylor 1994). Cronin and Taylor
(1994, p.125) coined the term "serviceperformance" [SERVPERF], to highlight
the importance of the process by which the service is delivered.
However, Gronroos' service quality model was not without criticism, and in an
attempt to address some of the limitations of his model, Gronroos collaborated
with Gummesson in revising his model (Gummesson and Gronroos 1987).
Gummesson developed an holistic approach to quality (4Q's model) from
845
extensive empirical material from a large manufacturing company. The 4Q's stand
for design quality, production quality, delivery quality and relational quality. As
Edvardsson et al. (1994) rightfully point out, relational quality is stressed because
it can in many cases counteract minor shortcomings in the other three qualities.
Based on the interactive approach to service delivery, Lehtinen and Lehtinen
(1985) suggested a two-dimensional and a three-dimensional approach to service
quality. The two-dimensional approach views service quality largely from a
consumer perspective and the dimensions are process quality and output quality.
The concept of process quality is based on the contention that service delivery and
consumption cannot be separated as the customer takes part in the production
process. The level of process quality achieved will depend on the way in which
both the service provider and the service customer participate in service delivery;
that is, on their participation style. If their participation style is complementary,
process quality is likely to be high. On the other hand, the three-dimensional
approach describes service quality in terms of physical quality, interactive quality,
and corporate quality. Interactive quality is the result of the interaction between
the customer and interactive elements.
By recognizing the role played by both the service employee and customer in the
service delivery process, Bitner (1988) proposed an extension of the traditional
marketing mix (4P's). Bitner's (1988) model is based on the hypothesis that there
is a positive relationship between satisfaction with the service encounter and
perceived quality.
Parasuraman et al. (1985) proposed that consumers are influenced in their
expectations of services by three important factors, namely: word of mouth
communications, personal needs, and past experience. When evaluating service
quality, consumers compare these expectations to actual service quality, and if
actual performance falls short of expectations, a "Gap" will exist. Parasuraman et
al. (1985) identified four key internal shortfalls or GAPS that could contribute to
the poor quality of service as perceived by customers. Their findings were
developed into a conceptual model, commonly referred to as the SERVQUAL
model, which implies a logical process which companies can employ to measure
and improve the quality of service. Furthermore, by focusing their research on the
providers' side of the conceptual model, Zeithaml, Parasuraman and Berry (1990)
were able to identify key factors contributing to the Gaps 1 through 4, and also
recommend methods by which these Gaps could be closed. In terms of its
relevance to this paper, only the factors contributing to GAP 3 and GAP 4 will be
addressed.
The service performance gap [GAP 3]
As depicted in Figure1, the service performance gap results when there is a
difference between the service specifications and the actual service delivered.
According to Zeithaml et al. (1990), the service performance gap results when
846
employees are unable and/or unwilling to perform the service at the desired level.
These researchers emphasize that opportunities for mistakes and
misunderstandings exist when service providers and customers interact. For
example, bank customers who use human tellers are likely to experience far more
service variability than those using ATM's.
Zeithaml et al. (1990) also suggest a number of ways by which the service
performance gap could be closed, for example, the provision of role clarity in job
descriptions and quality standards. These researchers assert that employees who
have control over their immediate job environment tend to be more committed
and focused; thus, front-line employees should be encouraged to take full
responsibility for their tasks and unnecessary restrictions be abolished. However,
although it may be argued that more freedom in the job environment will lead to
improved service, Hartline and Ferrel (1993) caution that empowerment of
employees increases role ambiguity.
FIGURE 1: POSSIBLE REASONS FOR THE SERVICE-PERFORMANCE
GAP
SERVICE QUALITY
SPECIFICATIONS
Role Conflict
Role Ambiguity
Poor employee job fit
Inappropriate supervisory control systems
Lack of teamwork
Poor technology job fit
Lack of perceived control
SERVICE DELIVERY
Source: Adapted from Zeithaml et al. (1990, p. 91)
The service delivery-communication gap [GAP 4]
Through advertising and other promotional campaigns, organizations sometimes
promise more than they can deliver. Inadequate communication between and
within departments can result in failure to deliver the advertised services.
Consumers should be informed about their roles in service delivery so that they
can derive the greatest benefit from the service provider. For example, bank
847
clients who are issued with certain ATM cards should be informed that they need
to be literate in order to operate the ATM machines so as to enjoy the convenience
of conducting transactions at their leisure.
From the preceding discussion of the various service quality models, it is apparent
that Gronroos (1983) and Parasuraman et al. (1985) are in agreement regarding
the evaluation of service quality among consumers. However, neither the work of
Gronroos (1983) nor Parasuraman et al. (1985) considered the participatory role
of the customer during the service encounter. Lehtinen and Lehtinen (1985)
specifically considered the notion of customer participation during the service
encounter.
Researchers (Schneider and Bowen 1995; Wikstrom 1996) have also commented
that service customers can be considered as 'partial employees' of the service
organization in order to increase service productivity. Since service customers
often take on the role of 'partial' employees during the service encounter, it is
important for the service organization to ascertain what management practices
could be used to ensure that the customers have the competencies to perform their
role as co-producers of the service. Thus it seems that the service firm managers
should devise strategies to manage both their full-time and 'partial' employees
(customers).
In view of the aforementioned, the proposed research model is based on the
following assumption/premise: Bank customers are members of the service
organization and are thus influenced by the same organizational variables as are
the full time employees.
PROPOSED SERVICE QUALITY MANAGEMENT MODEL
Zeithaml et al. (1990) suggested a number of ways by which the service
performance gap could be closed, inter-alia, the provision of role clarity in job
descriptions and quality standards, and informing employees about what is
expected of them and what the goals, objectives, strategies and philosophy of the
organization are. These suggestions imply the need for organizational
socialization of the service employees.
Organizational socialization is the process by which employees [individuals]
learn, appreciate, and internalize an organization's goals, values, social
knowledge, and expected behaviours necessary to fulfill their [new] roles and
function effectively within an organization's milieu (Allen and Meyer 1990;
Wagner and Hollenbeck 1996; Ashforth and Saks 1996). Wagner and Hollenbeck
(1996) argue that socialization tactics influence the role orientations that
newcomers ultimately adopt. However, despite the cogency of this typology,
research on the tactics has been relatively scarce.
848
Thus by proposing a model, this paper attempts to address this remark by focusing
on two types of socialization tactics, namely formal and informal. Formality is
the degree to which socialization takes place apart from the ongoing work of the
organization. In formal socialization, (new) employees are separated from others
while they learn about the organization and their tasks (Van Maanen and Schein,
1979 as cited by Wagner and Hollenbeck 1996, p. 288). In informal socialization,
[new] employees interact with more experienced employees, become integrated
into their work groups, and learn on the job. Thus formal socialization allows the
employees to see and learn what the organization wants them to learn; informal
socialization allows employees to experience the organization on their own terms.
Although a great deal of conceptual and empirical work has been done regarding
the socialization of employees of work organizations, the process of
organizational socialization and its impact upon the employees and customers
involved in the service encounter has only received limited attention (Kelley et al.
1992; Hartline and Ferrel, 1993).
The Service Employee: Organizational Socialization-Service Quality
Early researchers such as Dubinsky, Howell, Ingram and Bellenger (1986) argued
that the process of socialization is an extremely important facet of the orientation
of sales personnel. Although these researchers concentrated on the industrial
salespeople, the importance of the socialization of the sales/contact personnel of
the service organization can be based on the generally accepted characteristics
which differentiate services marketing from product marketing. For instance,
because services are intangible, in many cases the only tangible evidence (or cue)
available to compare quality and performance in a service transaction is the
contact person with whom they interact.
In service industries the contact person influences the customers' perception of the
organization, as in industrial sales situations; however, in the service sector the
contact person also is often the main cue for the customer regarding the service
being sold. For example, an insurance agent influences the consumer's perception
of the financial institution, as well as the insurance being sold. The intangibility of
services places increased importance upon the organizational socialization of the
contact personnel because service contact personnel may influence the customers'
perception of service quality, as well as of the organization. The inseparability of
production and consumption in the service sector also places added importance
upon organizational socialization. The production, delivery, and consumption of
the service often occur in physically and temporally inseparable environments
when a consumer is purchasing a service. Because the consumer does not
purchase a tangible product which can be removed from the purchase
environment and consumed (and evaluated) later at his/her convenience,
employee socialization becomes more important in the service sector.
849
A third characteristic of services involves high variance, or heterogeneity, in
service performance. A workforce that has been effectively socialized may help to
ensure a higher degree of consistency in the behaviour of contact personnel as
well as a more consistent and hopefully higher level of service quality. The
aforementioned does imply that proper socialization of the service employee is
imperative for service organizations and could be beneficial to both the service
organization and the service customer. In view of the aforementioned, it is
proposed that:
P1: Formal organizational socialization [FS] of the bank employees is positively
associated with the overall service quality [SQUAL] as perceived by the bank
customers.
P2: Informal organizational socialization [IS] of the bank employees is negatively
associated with the overall service quality [SQUAL] as perceived by the bank
customers.
Furthermore, the literature emphasized that because of the intangibility of most
services, the only tangible cue may be the service employee. In the light of this, it
is proposed that:
P3: The customers’ perception of the overall service quality [SQUAL] is
positively associated with their perception of the employee service quality
[EQUAL].
In view of P3, it may also be postulated that:
P4: Formal organizational socialization [FS] of the bank employees is positively
associated with the employee service quality [EQUAL] as perceived by the bank
customers.
P5: Informal organizational socialization [IS] of the bank employees is negatively
associated with the employee service quality [EQUAL] as perceived by the bank
customers.
The Service Customer: Organizational Socialization-Service Quality
The organizational socialization of the services customer had been discussed to a
lesser extent by Mills (1986). More recently, Schneider and Bowen (1995), by
adopting a Human Resource Management [HRM] perspective have argued that
the service customer should be socialized into the organization. Furthermore,
Kelley et al. (1992) on the basis of customer organization membership notion
developed by Barnard (1948) and Parsons (1970), maintain that the service
customer is a member of the service organization in the sense that he provides
resources to the service organization.
850
However, Kelley et al. (1990) caution that the active role of partial employee
played by the service customer results in the introduction of uncertainty in the
service production process. By citing various researchers (Mills and Moberg
1985; Mills 1986, Mills and Morris 1986) Kelley et al. (1992, p.197) posited that
the process of organizational socialization is one method available to the service
organization for reducing customer introduced uncertainty. Therefore, prior to
performing the role of "part-time" employee in the service organization the
service customer must have the necessary abilities, skills, and training, as well as
accurate role expectations. Moreover, a customer must be sufficiently motivated
to perform the role of partial employees during the service production. Thus the
process of organizational socialization provides a means by which the partial
employee can attain the abilities, skills, training, and motivation necessary to
develop accurate role expectations and properly perform the role.
Solomon et al. (1985) maintain that the interaction between employees and
customers during the service encounter is very important to the level of service
quality provided. These researchers contend that the role of the customer in the
service encounter is composed of a set of learned behaviour acquired through the
process of socialization. Furthermore, when customers and service employees
"read from a common script" [both are appropriately socialized into the
organization], the service encounter will be more satisfying to both (Solomon et
al. 1985, p. 94-111). According to Smith and Houston (1983, p.59), the socialized
customer should be more satisfied because his or her service expectations more
closely approximate the actual service provided. In view of the aforegoing, it is
proposed that:
P6: Formal organizational socialization [FS] of the bank customers is positively
associated with the overall service quality [SQUAL) as perceived by the bank
customers.
P7: Informal organizational socialization [IS] of the bank customers is negatively
associated with the overall service quality [SQUAL] as perceived by the bank
customers.
Furthermore, it may also be proposed that:
P8: Formal organizational socialization [FS] of the bank customers is positively
associated with the employee service quality [EQUAL) as perceived by the bank
customers.
P9: Informal organizational socialization [IS] of the bank customers] is negatively
associated with the employee service quality [EQUAL] as perceived by the bank
customers.
The aforementioned propositions are depicted in Figure 2.
851
FIGURE 2: PROPOSED SERVICE QUALITY MANAGEMENT
MODEL
Formal + Overall
Organizational Service
Socialization Quality
+
+
_
Informal
Employee
Organizational Service
Socialization _ Quality
SUMMARY
In this paper the researcher proposed that service quality could be managed by
managing both the service employee and service customer using Human
Resources Management tactics. By means of formal and informal socialization
strategies, service firm managers could influence both customers and employees,
which influence in turn would be reflected in the customers perception of the
employee service quality and overall service quality.
REFERENCES
Ashforth, B.E. and Sacks, A.M. (1996), “Socialization Tactics: Longitudinal
Effects on Newcomer Adjustment,” Academy of Management Journal, 30 (1),
149-178.
Allen, N.J. and Meyer, J.P. (1990), “Organizational Socialization Tactics: A
Longitudinal Analysis of Links to Newcomers' Commitment and Role
Orientation,” Academy of Management Journal, 33, 847-858.
Anderson, E.W., Forwell, C. and Lehman, D.F. (1994), “Customer Satisfaction,
Market Share and Profitability,” Journal of Marketing, 58 (3), 53-66.
Bergman, B and Klefsjo, B. (1994), Quality: From Customer Needs to Customer
Satisfaction. Sweden: Mc Graw-Hill.
Berry, L.L. (1986), “Big Ideas in Services Marketing,” Journal of Services
Marketing, 3 (2), 29-38.
Bowen, D.E. (1986), “Managing Customers as Human Resources in Service
852
Organizations,” Human Resources Management, 25, 371-384.
Buttle, F. (1996), “Is There a Place for Expectations in SERVQUAL?” Paper No.
294, UK: Manchester Business School.
Carman, J.M. (1990), “Consumer Perceptions of Service Quality: An Assessment
of the SERVQUAL Dimensions,” Journal of Retailing, 66 (1), 35-55.
Chase, R.B. (1978), “Where Does the Customer Fit in the Service Operation?”
Harvard Business Review, 56, 137-142.
Cronin, J.J., Jr. and Taylor, D.A. (1994), “SERVPERF versus SERVQUAL:
Reconciling Performance Based and Perceptions-Minus Expectations
Measurement of Service Quality.” Journal of Marketing, 58 (January), 125-131.
Dubinsky, A.J., Howell, R.D., Ingram, T.N. and Bellenger, D.N. (1986), “Sales
Force Socialization,” Journal of Marketing, 50 (4), 192-207.
Edvardsson, B., Thomasson, B. and Ovretveit, J. (1994), “Quality of Service:
Making it Really Work,” London, UK: McGraw-Hill.
Ennew, C.T., Reed. G.V and Binks, M.R. (1993), “Importance-Performance
Analysis and the Measurement of Service Quality,” European Journal of
Marketing, 27 (2), 59-70.
Gronroos, C. (1983), “Innovative Marketing Strategies and Organization
Structures for Service Firms,” in Emerging Perspectives on Services Marketing,
Berry, L.L., Shostack, G.L., and Upah, G.D., eds. Chicago: American Marketing
Association.
Gronroos, C. (1984), “A Service Quality Model and Its Marketing Implications,”
European Journal of Marketing, 18(4), 36-44.
Gummesson, E. and Gronroos, C. (1987), “Quality of Services: Lessons from the
Products Sector,” in Add Value to Your Service: The Key to Success, Suprenant,
C., ed. Chicago: American Marketing Association.
Hartline, M.D. and Ferrel, O.C. (1993), “Service Quality Implementation: The
Effects of Organizational Socialization and Managerial Actions on Customer-
Contact Employee Behaviours,” Marketing Science Institute Report No. 93-122,
Cambridge, MA: Marketing Science Institute.
Kelley, S.W., Skinner, S.J. and Donnelly, J.H. (1990), “Customer Participation in
Service Production and Delivery,” Journal of Retailing, 66 (3), 315-335.
----, ---- and ---- (1992), “Organizational Socialization of Service Customers,”
Journal of Business Research, 25 (3), 197-214.
853
Le Blanc, G. and Nguyen, N. (1988), “Customers' Perceptions of Service Quality
in Financial Institutions,” International Journal of Bank Marketing, 6 (4), 7-18.
Lehtinen, U. and Lehtinen, J.R. (1985), “Service Quality: A Study of Quality
Dimensions,” Paper read at the Second World Marketing Congress, University of
Stirling. Stirling, Scotland.
Levitt, T. (1972), “Production-Line Approach to Service,” Howard Business
Review, 50, 41-52.
Lovelock, C.H. and Young, R.F. (1979), “Look to Customers to Improve
Productivity,” Harvard Business Review, 57 (May-June), 168-178.
Mills, P.K. (1986), Managing Service Industries: Organizational Practices in a
Post-industrial Economy. Cambridge: Ballinger.
Ostrom, A. and Iacobucci, D. (1995), “ Consumer Trade-Offs and the Evaluation
of Services,” Journal of Marketing, 59 (January), 17-28.
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V.A., and Berry, L.L. (1985), “A Conceptual Model
of Service Quality and Its Implications for Future Research, “ Marketing Science
Institute Report 60-90, Cambridge, MA: Marketing Science Institute.
----, ---- and ---- 1988), “SERVQUAL: A Multiple-Item Scale for Measuring
Consumer Perceptions of Service Quality,” Journal of Retailing, 64 (1), 12-40.
----, ---- and ---- (1994), “A Reassessment of Expectations as a Comparative
Standard in Measuring Service Quality: Implications for Future Research,”
Journal of Marketing, 58 (January), 111-124.
Rust, R.T. and Zahorik, A.J. (1993), “Customer Satisfaction, Customer Retention
and Market Share,” Journal of Retailing, 69 (2), 193-215.
Schneider, B., Parkington, J.J. and Buxton, V.M. (1980), “Employee and
Customer Perceptions of Service in Banks,” Administrative Science Quarterly,
25, 252-267.
Schneider, B. and Bowen, D.E. (1993), “The Service Organization: Human
Resources Management is Crucial.” Organizational Dynamics, 21 (4), 15-22.
Schneider, B. and Bowen, D.E. (1995). Winning The Service Game. Boston:
Harvard Business School Press.
Silpakit, P. and Fisk, R.P. (1985), “ Participatizing the Service Encounter: A
Theoretical Framework,” in Services Marketing in a Changing Environment,
854
Bloch, T.M., Upah, G.D. and Zeithaml, V.A. eds. Chicago: American Marketing
Association.
Smith, R.A. and Houston, M.J. (1983), “Script-Based Evaluations of Satisfaction
With Services,” in Emerging Perspectives on Services Marketing, Berry, L.L.,
Shostack, G.L. and Upah, G.D. eds. Chicago: American Marketing Association.
Solomon, M.R., Surprenant, C., Czepiel, J.A. and Gutman, E.G. (1985), “A Role
Theory Perspective on Dyadic Interaction: The Service Encounter,” Journal of
Marketing, 49 (Winter), 99-111.
Teas, R.K. (1994), “Expectations as a Comparison Standard in Measuring Service
Quality: An Assessment of a Reassessment, “ Journal of Marketing, 50 (1), 132-
139.
Wagner, J.A., 111 and Hollenbeck, J.R. (1996), Management of Organizational
Behaviour. 2
nd
ed. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
Wikstrom, S. (1996), “The Customer as Co-Producer,” European Journal of
Marketing, 30 (4), 6-19.
Yavas, U., Arsan, N. and Dilber, M. (1994), “Organizational Gaps in Delivering
Banking Services: A Study of Bank Employees,” Journal of International
Marketing Research, 20 (1), 3-13.
Zeithaml, V.A., Parasuraman, A. and Berry, L.L. (1990), Delivering Quality
Service: Balancing Customer Perceptions and Expectations. New York: The Free
Press.
---- and Bitner, M.J. (1996), Service Marketing. New York: McGraw-Hill.
