Content uploaded by Herring Shava
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Herring Shava on Nov 07, 2021
Content may be subject to copyright.
Eurasian Journal of Business and Management, 9(3), 2021, 217-232
DOI: 10.15604/ejbm.2021.09.03.004
EURASIAN JOURNAL OF BUSINESS AND
MANAGEMENT
www.eurasianpublications.com
SERVICE QUALITY AND CUSTOMER SATISFACTION EXPERIENCE AMONG
SOUTH AFRICAN MOBILE TELECOMMUNICATIONS CONSUMERS
Herring Shava
Walter Sisulu University, South Africa
Email: hshava@wsu.ac.za
Received: June 14, 2021 Accepted: August 28, 2021
Abstract
Mobile networks have become the most utilized pathway of communication but very little
information is available on customers’ experiences with respect to service quality and satisfaction.
Through a survey, data was gathered from 1451 participants to examine customers’ experiences
of service quality and satisfaction. The study investigated whether service quality and customer
satisfaction experiences were different in respect of the mobile network operator used by the
customer. This study is cross sectional by design and quantitative in nature. A self-administered
questionnaire was used to gather primary data from mobile network users. Descriptive and
inferential statistics were used to analyze the data. For inferential statistics, the multivariate
analysis of variance (MANOVA) was used. The results revealed that the mobile network operator
used by the customer, had a significant impact on service quality and customer satisfaction levels.
This study contributes academically by indicating how South African consumers perceive mobile
network service providers. Furthermore, the study identifies shortcomings and areas of strengths
of South African mobile network operators with regards to service quality and customer
satisfaction.
Keywords: Mobile Network, Service Quality, Customer Satisfaction, MTN, Vodacom, Telkom,
Cell C
1. Introduction
The mobile network telecommunications sector in South Africa (SA) continues to grow in terms
of customers and mobile network operators (Oxford Business Group, 2021). The majority of
mobile network users are shared between MTN, Vodacom, Cell C and Telkom who are currently
the big players in the industry (Statista, 2019). According to BusinessTech (2019), Vodacom is
the leading market share holder with 43.2 million subscribers, followed by MTN’s 31.2 million
subscribers, making them the two giants in SA’s mobile network telecommunications sector. Khan
(2016) reported that Vodacom had 37.7% of the market share followed by MTN’s 35.9%.
The SA mobile network telecommunications market is evolving from being a duopolistic
market to a four firm race as far as customer service delivery and satisfaction is concerned
(Khumalo, 2019). By the end of the year 2019, Telkom, the newcomer in the industry had a total
of 5.2 million subscribers while Cell C took its tally to 17.2 million subscribers. Other players do
H. Shava / Eurasian Journal of Business and Management, 9(3), 2021, 217-232
218
exist (FNB Connect, Pick n Pay, MRP Mobile, Me & You Mobile) but operate under the Cell C
network with at least 1.8 million subscribers (BussinessTech, 2019).
The SA mobile network telecommunications service industry is a highly competitive
environment characterized by tight profit margins. SA mobile services firms compete vigorously
to gain customer loyalty (Chair, 2016). This is evident in the introduction of various promotions
packages such as free night calls for mobile users who share the same mobile network operator,
discounted rates and sometimes free calls are offered to customers for a limited number of
minutes during day time (Chair, 2016; ResearchICTAfrica, 2018). Faced with intense competition
in the market, some South African mobile network operators provide prepaid airtime on a credit
basis to selected customers to boost their revenues (Chair, 2016). Given that customers have a
wide choice, mobile network operators have begun widening their offerings in an attempt to lure
new customers and keep existing ones (Khumalo, 2019).
SA mobile operators are going all out to try attract new customers, satisfy, delight and
keep existing subscribers loyal. Despite all these efforts, South African consumers were found to
be highly dissatisfied with their mobile network service providers, generating at least five times
more negative conversation about their service providers as opposed to positive (BrandsEye,
2019). On the contrary, making use of the Minnesota Customer-satisfaction Index (MnCSI),
Mpwanya (2019) found that customer satisfaction levels with service delivery by SA network
mobile operators were high. Interestingly, Mpwanya (2019) also found that the proportion of
dissatisfied customers with service delivery of SA mobile network operators was also high and
this was negatively impacting on the reputation of these operators. Further, these South African
mobile network operators are all facing a similar challenge, which is how to retain existing
customers and recruit new ones. This study argues that by providing superior service quality and
satisfaction experience to customers, there is a better chance that customers may be loyal to their
chosen mobile network service provider and refer new potential users. This study seeks to
investigate mobile network customers’ experiences with regard to service quality and satisfaction.
The study further investigates whether service quality and customer satisfaction experiences are
different in respect of the mobile network operator used by the customer.
Santouridis and Trivellas (2010) found that satisfied Greek mobile customers were also
loyal to their mobile network operators. They found that customer service, pricing and billing
strategies were key dimensions that predicted customer satisfaction. Mpwanya (2019) found high
levels of satisfied customers with regards to customer service received from mobile network
operators and also a significant number of dissatisfied customer on the same subject. Ngwenya
(2017) investigated mobile network customer expectations in relation to service quality. Making
use of the SERVQUAL tool to measure service quality, Ngwenya (2017) provided evidence
showing that South African customers consider assurance and responsiveness as key
dimensions of service quality. Ngwenya’s (2017) findings almost confirm the findings of a South
African study undertaken 15 years before by Van der Wal et al. (2002), who undertook a study
to validate the SERVQUAL measurement tool making use mobile network customers. They found
that tangibles and reliability factors loaded separately but factors for assurance, responsiveness
and empathy loaded as a single factor. This implied that South African mobile network customers
saw no real difference in these dimensions.
Similar to other South African studies that relied on the SERVQUAL tool to measure
service quality, this study adopts the SERVQUAL tool to measure service quality of mobile
network operators from a customer’s perspective. SA’s mobile network industry is growing at a
faster rate with many players joining in the field yet research on customer satisfaction devoted to
this sector is lagging behind (Mpwanya, 2019). Only a handful studies have investigated a related
issue (Mpwanya and Van Herden, 2017; Ngwenya, 2017; Mpwanya 2019; Mpwanya and
Letsoalo, 2019; Van der Wal et al. 2002). SA customers’ satisfaction levels as influenced by
service delivery of network mobile operators is still a complex issue that requires further
examination and this study seeks to contribute to this debate. The findings of this research will
aid South African mobile network operators in their efforts to protect their brands, attracting new
customers, and keep the existing customers satisfied with the service they offer. The next section
provides the research context, followed by literature review, and the study’s methodology.
Thereafter, results are presented and they are followed by a discussion section which is also
H. Shava / Eurasian Journal of Business and Management, 9(3), 2021, 217-232
219
followed by an acknowledgement of the study’s limitations leading to future research suggestions
and the conclusion of the study.
2. Research context
The main challenge faced by consumers in the South African mobile network telecommunications
sector is that of high data prices and Internet connectivity speed when compared to developed
markets (Gillwald et al. 2012; Densmore et al. 2016; ResearchICTafrica, 2017, 2018). The
downside to the cost of data is that customers find it very difficult to be loyal to a single mobile
service provider. As a result, customers have multiple SIM cards, that is, they use more affordable
networks for data and then switch to more affordable networks for calling (ResearchICTafrica,
2017). This customer behavior is in response to different billing strategies for different services
pursued by SA mobile network operators.
Due to the high cost of data, the Independent Communications Authority South Africa
(ICASA) introduced the data roll over regulation in 2019. Before the implementation of the ICASA
regulations in April 2019, customers would see their airtime being utilized for Internet connectivity
without their consent. Although the data rollover rules were implemented, not all mobile network
providers welcomed this regulation (BrandsEye, 2019). According to the BrandsEye’s (2019),
Vodacom was on the main receiving end, after consumers had vented their anger over its
implementation of the data regulations. According to de Villiers (2019), consumers criticized
Vodacom for finding loopholes in the ICASA regulations with the goal of avoiding compliance.
BrandsEye (2019) weighed in and pointed out that Vodacom’s behavior influenced many of its
subscribers to consider withdrawing their subscription. It is understood that South African mobile
network operators were benefiting highly from this practice, hence the perceived unwillingness to
comply with the new Data Bundle Rollover rules.
Telkom, however, received favorable responses from consumers, for being proactive in
the implementation of ICASA rules (BrandsEye, 2019; de Villiers, 2019). By doing so, customers’
satisfaction with Telkom services enhanced, while customer confidence in Vodacom was low.
South African mobile networks are also blamed for bleeding customers on social media
connectivity with over 120.000 online consumers indicating their displeasure with this subject
(BrandsEye, 2019). Given this background, we can insinuate that, SA mobile network customers
are yet to be convinced about some mobile network operators’ sincerity as far as lowering the
cost of data is concerned. For example, MTN customers have observed that their airtime is
automatically utilized for Internet connectivity unless they change certain settings.
The danger with MTN’s approach is that not all customers possess such knowledge. This
could be attributed to little efforts being undertaken by South African mobile network operators to
educate their customers on how they can save money. BrandsEye (2019) weighed in and
lamented that South African networks are profiteering through social media at the expense of the
customers they claim to serve. The majority of customers learned the hard way, after they realized
that they ran out of airtime without any warning. With such costly practices being perpetuated, to
customers, it appears as if mobile network operators are happy to continue profiteering at the
expense of the consumer who is realizing little value from the highly priced data. On this notion,
Gillwald et al. (2012) pointed out that data has become the dominant revenue stream for mobile
network operators in South Africa. However, South African mobile network operators can change
this narrative by being proactive as far as educating customers on how they can get value for the
money they spend when calling or surfing the Internet.
However, the pricing of data somehow stands as a barrier to growth desired for South
Africa if the country is to catch up with the rest of world (BrandsEye, 2019; Mpwanya and Van
Heerden, 2016). High cost of data and call per minute influence customers to switch mobile
network operators in search for the affordable one. Melody (2001) mentioned that in a competitive
market, service providers are expected to compete on both price and quality of service. More
importantly, service providers should strive to meet customer expectations with regards to price
and quality of service if their brands are to emerge as winners. Jere and Mukupa (2018)
investigated customer satisfaction and loyalty drivers among Zambian mobile network users and
found no relationship between price and customer satisfaction. A Nigerian study found that pricing
H. Shava / Eurasian Journal of Business and Management, 9(3), 2021, 217-232
220
or billing practices of mobile network operators influenced subscribers buying decisions such that
when prices are high, customers would switch to an affordable operator (Adebiyi et al. 2016).
BrandsEye (2019) reported that 10% of the respondents in South Africa were willing to part ways
with their network provider as they are unhappy with the pricing and poor customer service. Given
this evidence, it could mean that the South African market for mobile networks is highly price
sensitive compared to other mobile network markets in the region.
Further findings by BrandsEye (2019) revealed that customer service practices by mobile
network operators required urgent attention as 47.2% of the complaints raised were directed
specifically at the quality of customer service. Approximately 37% complained about the mobile
network provider’s turnaround time, and 44.4% of the respondents complained about the network
provider’s failure to attend to queries posted on social media. But in cases where the network
provider did respond, 61% of the consumers ended up being dissatisfied with the quality of service
rendered. According to Khumalo (2019), Vodacom seemed to be doing better as it responded to
customer complaints posted on social media 2.25 times faster than the industry’s average
response time.
Given the important role that mobile network services play in consumers’ lives, there is
increased interaction between mobile network operators and their consumers (Venkatesh et al.
2010; Xueming et al. 2014). As a result, there is also increased spending by mobile service
providers on technological infrastructure with the goal of acquiring competitive advantage. Mobile
network operators are investing more as they try to reach out to their customers as is evident in
the opening of customer walk-in shops, as opposed to the common use of call centers (Ngwenya,
2017). In South Africa, both in small towns and cities, retail outlets owned by mobile network
operators are highly visible. This practice of opening customer walk-in shops by mobile network
operators is critical for increased brand visibility, and it enables mobile network operators to
interact face-to-face with their customers as opposed to contact with call centers.
The use of call centers could be an affordable approach as far as operational costs are
concerned. On the one hand, the use of call centers deprives customers of face-to-face contact
experience with the mobile network provider. On the other hand, the mobile network operator is
also deprived the opportunity to impress the customer through body language, and other
customer service acts, associated with face-to-face contact. Given the South African marketing
environment, the majority of customers still prefer and depend highly on face-to-face customer
service experience. In most cases, the choice of contact the customer will choose to have with
the service provider is also influenced by the customer’s social class.
It is widely acknowledged that service quality and customer satisfaction are important
factors as they set services companies apart. In South Africa, mobile service customers switch
service providers at a much faster pace than ever before as they seek for better deals. This is
easier for customers given that above 90% do not pay monthly subscriptions (Maharaj, 2012).
Could this be attributed to service quality and customer satisfaction experience? Given this
background, this study sought to answer the following questions:
Does services quality and customer satisfaction experience differ significantly between
mobile network operators in South Africa?
Which mobile network operator in South Africa do customers rate better on service quality
and customer satisfaction experience?
The investigation of customers’ experience of service quality and satisfaction is critical to
service providers for enhancing service delivery, brand protection, market share analysis and
crafting future-oriented expansion strategies in the competition intense mobile
telecommunications sector (Arsal and Yatera, 2014; Selelo and Lekobane, 2017). From these
strategies, customers stand to benefit by receiving additional value on money spent.
H. Shava / Eurasian Journal of Business and Management, 9(3), 2021, 217-232
221
3. Literature review
3.1. Service quality
South African studies have examined customer service in the mobile telecommunications sector
and they measured service quality making use of the SERVQUAL tool (Ngwenya, 2017; Van Der
Wal, 2002). The SERVQUAL tool outlines that service quality can be assessed through tangibility,
reliability, responsiveness, assurance and empathy (Parasuraman et al. 1985). The element of
tangibility speaks to how the physical environment of the environment appeals to the customer,
including the employees, communication material and equipment. Several studies particularly in
the hospitality sector provide evidence suggesting that employee dress code, for example,
uniforms give customers an idea of the service to expect (Nelson and Bowen, 2000). Thusyanthy
and Senthilnathan (2011) found evidence that layout of physical facilities also determined the
service that commercial banks can provide as they seek to satisfy their clients. Overall, they found
that tangibles lead to high customer interaction leading to higher levels of customer satisfaction.
With regard to reliability, this is the ability of the entity’s employees to deliver the service
on demand when needed and with little margin of error. Responsiveness speaks to the willingness
of the employees to immediately solve customer related queries from time to time. The fourth
element of SERVQUAL is assurance which speaks to the ability of employees to deliver their
duties with courtesy, their ability to make customers trust and have confidence in them that they
possess the required knowledge to successfully address customer concerns. The final element
is empathy which refers to the ability of employees to provide care and attention which is
customer’s desire.
The SA mobile network operators conduct business in a challenging and ever-changing
market environment (Mpwanya and Van Heerden, 2017). Challenges affecting the mobile
telecommunications network in South Africa, include low disposable income of customers, poor
network quality and high services costs (Mpwanya and Van Heerden, 2017; Mpwanya and
Letsoalo, 2019). Therefore, to succeed, service quality becomes a critical factor as measured by
the SERVQUAL. The situation is exacerbated by the observation that the mobile
telecommunications sector, especially in South Africa, is becoming an increasingly saturated
environment (Morgan and Govender, 2017). As a result, firms in this sector must devise
innovative strategies to enhance service quality (Mpwanya, 2019).
By focusing on tangibility, responsiveness, reliability, empathy and assurance, SA mobile
network operators may be able to increase customer value and in turn enhance customer
satisfaction. When customers gain value from their continued use of a particular service provider,
it will make them feel good about their choices. Service providers desperately need this kind of
customer evaluation as it leads to lower customer acquisition costs through practices such as
word of mouth and/or referrals. In agreement, Izogo (2015) pointed out that service quality is
widely acknowledged in marketing literature as a key predictor of customer loyalty.
Research indicates that in competitive sectors, such as the mobile telecommunications
industry, service quality becomes the tool which consumers rely on to categorize and rank firms
(Ofori et al. 2018). Srivastava and Sharma (2013) concurred and pointed out that when firms are
competing in the same sector, and they need to be able to outmaneuver competition, it is critical
to offer superior service quality. Ladhari and Leclerc (2013) agreed and further emphasized that
if mobile network operators would want to differentiate themselves from competition, they should
focus on service quality.
The importance of service quality cannot be underestimated as it also plays a critical role
in building the entity’s image and reputation (Lai et al. 2009). On the same notion, Bennett (2017)
argued that an entity can only build a superior brand or image when the entity’s products are
perceived to be of superior quality compared to the competition’s offerings.
3.2. Customer satisfaction
Customer satisfaction is better explained by making use of the disconfirmation paradigm (Smith
and Houston, 1983). The disconfirmation paradigm explains that in a situation where the product
or service performance is equal to the customer’s expectations, the customer is said to be
H. Shava / Eurasian Journal of Business and Management, 9(3), 2021, 217-232
222
satisfied. Similarly, when the product or service performance exceeds a customer’s expectations,
the customer will be satisfied. The situation is, however, different when the product or service is
below the customer’s expectations, in which case the customer becomes dissatisfied (Lamb et
al. 2015). Oliver (1999) emphasized the importance of satisfaction by pointing out that it is the
critical factor that subsequently influences human behavior, for example repeated sales and
loyalty which result in high profitability. In the mobile telecommunications sector, this could mean
that the customer will continue to subscribe to one service provider. Satisfied customers do
wonders for the firm, for example they spread the word, informing others about their good
experience with the entity in question (Saghier and Nathan, 2013). Some satisfied customers go
further to paying price premiums with ease (Lamb et al. 2015). Word of mouth, and the willingness
of customers to pay price premiums are critical factors to the firm’s profitability, growth and
sustainability and only satisfied customers can provide such. Conversely, unsatisfied customers
often complain to other sources, for example, pro-consumer organizations or activists.
Furthermore, unsatisfied customers can choose to buy less from the entity in question, and some
customers may cease doing business with entity completely (Mazibuko, 2016).
4. Methodology
The study was quantitative in nature and descriptive by design. Data was gathered by means of
a survey and the study can be classified as a cross-sectional study. In other words, conclusions
reached in this study are limited to one period of time (the time at which the study was
undertaken), and are subject to further tests based on data gathered at other different time
intervals. Self-administered questionnaires was used to collect data from 1544 mobile network
customers. The Eastern Cape province of South Africa was the targeted geographical area for
this research. The Eastern Cape Province is the third largest province in terms of population size
in South Africa, after Gauteng and KwaZulu-Natal provinces. Convenience sampling was
undertaken as there was no sampling frame available from which to select the respondents. To
ensure bias, errors were minimized, a large sample size was used. Participants were approached
at random and selected on the basis that they own and make use of a mobile phone. Respondents
were approached at different areas that provided access to a large number of individuals at a
given time. Thus, shopping malls and institutions of higher learning (universities and colleges)
were targeted. From the completed questionnaires received, 1,451 had sufficient data to proceed
to the analysis stage, giving a 94% response rate.
4.1. Research procedure
Hundred and fifty-six trained field workers assisted in the data collection. Participants were
informed upfront that data obtained was to be used for teaching and learning as well as for
research purposes. Possible harm resulting from participating in the study was explained to
participants. Further, participates were advised that they had the right to refuse and/or terminate
participation at any time. Having informed the participants of their rights, informed consent to
participate in the study and utilize the data as explained was sought and obtained. To maintain
confidentiality, participants were further informed not to endorse their names, signatures or any
symbol that could give away their identities.
4.2. Research instrument
The research instrument was subdivided into three sections. Section one of the questionnaire had
four items focusing on the demographic distribution of the respondents (age, home language,
education level and mobile network operator used by the participant). Section two of the
questionnaire focused on SERVQUAL dimensions. To measure service quality, this study
followed the approach taken by different authors in different countries who also investigated
service quality and customer satisfaction in the mobile network telecommunications sector
(Ngwenya, 2017; Van der Wal, 2002). Such studies adopted while others modified the
SERVQUAL scale developed by Parasuraman et al. (1985), (Agyapong, 2011; Loke et al. 2011;
H. Shava / Eurasian Journal of Business and Management, 9(3), 2021, 217-232
223
Selelo and Lekobane, 2017). The SERVQUAL model is based on the principle that for a customer
to remain satisfied, an individual organization ought to realize that the service quality it offers is
within the expected range. South African mobile customers have access to call center facilities
and in store assistance. Therefore, tangibility, reliability, responsiveness, empathy and assurance
that forms part of the dimensions of SERVQUAL were considered relevant to this study. These
dimensions were used to investigate service quality and customer satisfaction experiences
among SA mobile network customers.
Tangibility was measured by four items and the reliability score was found to be 0.774;
reliability was measured by five items and the reliability score was found to be 0.802;
responsiveness was measured by four items and the reliability score was found to be 0.764;
empathy was measured by five items and the reliability score was found to be 0.805; while
assurance was measured by four items and the reliability score was found to be 0.785. This
means that the SERVQUAL tool has an internal consistency that is acceptable given the
benchmark score of 0.7.
The SERVQUAL items were measured on a 7-point Likert scale anchored by 1 = strongly
disagree and 7 = strongly agree, being the highest score. Section three of the questionnaire
focused on customer satisfaction. The customer satisfaction scale was subdivided into two parts.
The first part had four items and the reliability score was found to be 0.858. The four items in Part
A were measured on a 7-point Likert scale anchored by 1 = very dissatisfied and 7 = very satisfied,
as the top score. The second part of the customer satisfaction scale had two items and the
reliability score was found to be 0.821. The two items were also measured on a 7-point Likert
scale anchored by 1 = very poor and 7 = exceptional. The Cronbach alpha coefficient was used
to assess the reliability of the scales. Similarly, the customer satisfaction scale is reliable given
that it has a Cronbach coefficient greater than 0.7.
4.3 Demographic distribution of the participants
Approximately 61% of the respondents were aged 25 and below, making them the dominant
group, followed by the 26 – 30 age category (25%), 31-35 years (8%), 36-40 years (4%), 41-45
years (1%) and lastly, the 46 years and above category also represented by 1%. The distribution
of respondents by gender was 53% female participants and 47% representing male participants.
Regarding the education level of the participants, matric certificate holders were 22%, diploma
holders 7%, first degree holders 48%, Honors or postgraduate diploma holders 13%, Master’s
degree holders 7% and PhD holders 3% respectively. The distribution of respondents by home
language was Xhosa 67%, isiZulu 14%, Sotho 7%, Tswana 3%, English 4%, Afrikaans 2%, and
3% representing other languages. In relation to mobile network operator used by the participants,
the distribution was as follows: MTN (41%), Vodacom (23%), Cell C (22%), and Telkom (15%).
4.4 Data analysis
To make meaning of the data, the Statistical Package of Social Sciences (SPSS), version 25 was
used as a data analysis tool. Descriptive statistics were performed from which frequencies were
derived, reported and interpreted. Making use of multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA),
significant differences in service quality and customer satisfaction experience by mobile network
operator used were established.
5. Results
Descriptive statistics were undertaken to compare mobile network customer experience of
tangibility, reliability, responsiveness, empathy, assurance and satisfaction scale items. MTN,
Vodacom, Cell C and Telkom customer responses to each item on the tangibility scale were
examined. Approximately 76% of MTN and 78.6% of Vodacom customers agreed with the
statement that their service providers had up-to-date equipment. Although Cell C customers
agreed with the statement that the mobile network operator had up-to-date equipment, this item
H. Shava / Eurasian Journal of Business and Management, 9(3), 2021, 217-232
224
received the lowest rating on the scale represented by 62.1% but ranked second by Telkom
customers represented by 71.5%.
Cell C and Telkom customers unanimously agreed and rated item four of the tangibility
scale by stating that the physical appearance of the facilities of the service providers was in
keeping with the type of telecommunication services, represented by 70.3% and 77.6%
respectively. Also important to note was that Telkom customers gave the lowest ranking to the
second item of the tangibility scale stating that the service providers’ physicals are visually
appealing. This item was rated third by MTN, Vodacom and Cell C customers.
Mobile network customer experience focusing on reliability of the service providers was
examined. Item three of the reliability scale stating that the network provider provided service
correctly was rated first by three mobile network providers’ customers represented by MTN
(81.3%), Vodacom (83.6%), and Telkom (84.2%) respectively. The same item was rated third by
Cell C users, represented by 72.4%. Conversely, Cell C users rated their service provider highly
on item two pointing out that when they have problems, Cell C always shows a sincere interest in
solving such problems. The same item was ranked second by MTN users, and third by both
Telkom users and Vodacom users. Although MTN customers agreed with the first item stating
that “when the network provider promised to do something at a certain time, it does so”, it actually
received a low agree percentage rate of 75 but better than the 68.8% for Cell C. Conversely,
Telkom customers rated the first item as the second highest with an 81.3% agree response rate.
SA Mobile network user experience with respect to responsiveness scale items was
examined. On the one hand, of the four scale items, MTN and Telkom users rated the third item
highly stating that “my network provider is always willing to help”, as represented by 82.9% and
83.4% respectively. However, Cell C and Vodacom customers rated the same item second and
third as represented by 77.6% and 82.5% respectively. On the other hand, Vodacom and Cell C
users gave a high rating to the second item of the scale stating that “my network provider provides
prompt services to customers”, as represented by 82.9% and 78.1% respectively. Although all
customers were in agreement as opposed to disagreeing, the same item was rated third by
Telkom customers represented by 77.7% and rated fourth by MTN users represented by 78.1%.
On the responsiveness scale, Cell C and Telkom users rated fourth the first scale item stating
that “the network provider informs clients when the services will be performed”. This is contrary
to Vodacom users who rated it second and MTN customers who rated it third.
The empathy scale had five items and of the five items, Vodacom, Cell C and Telkom
customers gave a high rating to the second item stating that “my network provider’s employees
deals with clients with care”, as represented by 84.3%, 77.5% and 81.6% respectively. MTN users
rated the same item as third highest, receiving an agree score of 79.5%. MTN customers,
however, rated their service provider highly on item five of the scale stating that “my network
provider has convenient operating hours”. This item was rated third by Vodacom users, second
by Cell C users and fourth by Telkom users. Cell C and Telkom users rated the first item of the
scale as fifth, stating that “my network provider gives you individual attention” while the same item
was rated second by Vodacom users and fourth by MTN users. MTN and Vodacom customers
rated fifth the third item of the scale stating that “my network provider has the client’s best interest
at heart” while Telkom users rated it third and Cell C users rated it fourth.
The assurance scale had four items where MTN and Vodacom users rated the fourth item
high which stated that “employees of my network provider have enough knowledge to deal with
clients requests”. However, a similar case was not evident with Cell C users who rated it second
and with Telkom users who rated it fourth. Cell C and Telkom users gave a high rating to the third
item on the assurance scale stating that “employees of my network provider are very professional
when executing their duties”, while Vodacom users rated it second highest, and MTN users rating
it third highest. Further, MTN and Telkom users rated the first item of the assurance scale as
second, stating that “I feel safe when I am dealing with my network provider”. However, Vodacom
and Cell C users rated the same item as third.
Mobile network customer satisfaction experience was also investigated making use of
the customer satisfaction scale made up of part A with four items and part B with two items. MTN,
Cell C and Telkom users gave a high rating to the fourth item stating that “overall I am satisfied
with the offerings of my network provider”. However, the same item was ranked fourth by
H. Shava / Eurasian Journal of Business and Management, 9(3), 2021, 217-232
225
Vodacom customers. Vodacom customers instead gave a high rating to the second item of the
customer satisfaction scale stating that “Are you satisfied with the services of your network
provider?” Approximately 82% of Vodacom users indicated that they were satisfied with the
service of the network provider. With respect to Part B of the customer satisfaction scale, a similar
trend was observed from all customers across mobile network operators. The trend is that for the
very poor to fair response categories, there are very low ratings of not more than 12% but
customer rating fairly improved from the good to exceptional category across all mobile network
operators. This generally indicates that customers were somehow satisfied with their mobile
network operator services although ratings differ quite significantly.
Descriptive statistics suggest that mobile network customer service and satisfaction
experience differ across all four mobile network operators examined in this study. However, to
determine if service quality and customer satisfaction experience differences are significant, given
their distinct mobile network providers, MANOVA was performed. MANOVA is designed to
perform many functions but key to this study was its ability to detect whether groups (MTN users,
Vodacom Users, Cell C users and Telkom users) differ along a combination of variables, that is
customer satisfaction and service quality dimensions (tangibility, reliability, responsiveness,
empathy and assurance). Results of the MANOVA are displayed in Table 1 and Table 2
respectively.
From Table 1, making use of W ilk’s Lambda, it can be observed that there was a
significant effect of the mobile network operator used by the customer on services quality
experience as measured by SERVQUAL dimensions (tangibility, reliability, responsiveness,
empathy and assurance), and customer satisfaction experience ʌ = 0.96, F(18, 4079) = 3.68, p =
0.000. From this result, the conclusion is that the type of mobile network operator used by the
customer has a significant effect on service quality and customer satisfaction experience. The
separate univariate ANOVAs on the outcome variables also confirm this relationship as they
reveal a significant mobile network operator effect on tangibility F(3, 1447) = 13.842, p = 0.000;
reliability, F(3, 1447) = 9.834, p = 0.000; responsiveness, F(3, 1447) = 4.242, p = 0.000; empathy,
F(3, 1447) = 6.866, p = 0.000; assurance, F(3, 1447) = 6.645, p = 0.000; and customer
satisfaction, F(3, 1447) = 11.265, p = 0.000.
Table 1. MANOVA output – Multivariate tests
Multivariate testsa
Effect
Value
F
Hypothesis
df
Error df
Sig.
Partial Eta
Squared
Intercept
Pillai's Trace
0.973
8593.475b
6.000
1442.000
0.000
0.973
Wilks' Lambda
0.027
8593.475b
6.000
1442.000
0.000
0.973
Hotelling's Trace
35.756
8593.475b
6.000
1442.000
0.000
0.973
Roy's Largest Root
35.756
8593.475b
6.000
1442.000
0.000
0.973
Mobile
network
Pillai's Trace
0.045
3.658
18.000
4332.000
0.000
0.015
Wilks' Lambda
0.955
3.678
18.000
4079.077
0.000
0.015
Hotelling's Trace
0.046
3.695
18.000
4322.000
0.000
0.015
Roy's Largest Root
0.035
8.358c
6.000
1444.000
0.000
0.034
Note: a. Design: Intercept + Mobile network. b. Exact statistic. c. The statistic is an upper bound on F that
yields a lower bound on the significance level.
Source: Author’s own preparation.
Table 1 provides evidence suggesting that the mobile network used by the customer has
a significant effect on service quality and customer satisfaction experience. However, the nature
of this effect is not yet clear from the multivariate statistic, that is, which group (mobile network
operator) differed from which, or whether the effect of the mobile network operator used is on
service quality and customer satisfaction experience or a combination of both. To establish the
effect, the MANOVA was followed up with a discriminant analysis and the results are displayed
in Table 2.
H. Shava / Eurasian Journal of Business and Management, 9(3), 2021, 217-232
226
Table 2. Output from the discriminant analysis (Eigenvalues, Wilk’s lambda and structure
matrix)
Eigenvalues
Function
Eigenvalue
% of Variance
Cumulative %
Canonical Correlation
1
0.035a
75.2
75.2
0.183
2
0.009a
18.7
93.9
0.093
3
0.003a
6.1
100.0
0.053
Wilks' Lambda
Test of Function(s)
Wilks' Lambda
Chi-square
df
Sig.
1 through 3
0.955
65.797
18
0.000
2 through 3
0.989
16.467
10
0.087
3
0.997
4.037
4
0.401
Structure matrix
Function
1
2
3
Tangibility
0.902*
-0.031
-0.395
Customer Satisfaction
0.804*
-0.085
0.549
Reliability
0.712*
0.564
0.102
Empathy
0.608*
0.385
0.203
Assurance
0.564*
0.545
0.244
Responsiveness
0.489*
0.239
0.047
Note: a. First 3 canonical discriminant functions were used in the analysis. Pooled within-groups correlations
between discriminating variables and standardized canonical discriminant functions. Variables ordered by
absolute size of correlation within function. *. Largest absolute correlation between each variable and any
discriminant function Source: Author’s own preparation
Results outlined in Table 2 combine three key mini-tables from the discriminant analysis
output, namely the eigenvalues, Wilk’s Lambda and the structure matrix. The first discriminant
function explained 75.2% of the variance, canonical R2 = 0.033. The second discriminant function
explained 18.7% of the variance, canonical R2 = 0.009 and the third explained 6.1% of the
variance, canonical R2 = 0.003. In combination, these discriminant functions significantly
differentiated the mobile network operators ʌ = 0.96, X2(18) = 65.80, p = 0.000, but removing the
second and third functions did not significantly differentiate mobile network operators ʌ = 0.99,
X2(10) = 16.45, p = 0.087; and ʌ = 0.997, X2(4) = 4.04, p = 0.401. The correlations between
outcomes and the discriminant functions revealed that tangibility loaded highly onto the first
function (r = 0.902) compared to the second (r = -0.031) and the third function (r = -0.395).
Customer satisfaction loaded highly onto the first function (r = 0.804) and poorly on the second
function (r = -0.085) but reasonably higher on the third function (r = 0.549). Other outcome
variables, that is reliability, empathy, assurance and responsiveness behaved similarly, the
correlations loaded highly on the first function, fairly high on the second function and marginally
high on the third function.
6. Discussion
6.1. Contribution to literature on service quality in the mobile network telecommunications
sector
The findings in this study indicate that the performance of South African mobile network operators
varies significantly. With respect to tangibility, Vodacom received the highest average positive
rating of 75.34%, followed by Telkom’s 72.43%, MTN’s 68.23% and Cell C anchored the list with
an average positive rating of 64.28%. Vodacom further topped the list on service reliability ratings
with an average positive rating of 81.92% followed by Telkom’s 80.04%, MTN’s 77.86% and Cell
C further anchored the list with an average positive rating of 72.22%. A similar trend was also
observed with respect to responsiveness ratings. Vodacom topped the list with an average
positive rating of 82.63%, followed by Telkom’s 79.78%, MTN’s 79.73% and Cell C’s 76.28%.
H. Shava / Eurasian Journal of Business and Management, 9(3), 2021, 217-232
227
With respect to empathy, Vodacom also came top with an average positive rating of 82.44%,
followed by Telkom’s 79.9%, MTN’s 78.72% and Cell C’s 74.48%. Vodacom further topped the
list on assurance with an average positive rating of 79.7% followed by MTN’s 77.98%, T elkom’s
77.15% and Cell C’s 72.68%.
Overall, given the customer ratings of their mobile network operators with respect to
service quality, Vodacom came out top with an average rating of 80.41% followed by Telkom’s
77.86%, MTN’s 76.50% and Cell C’s 71.99%. This finding is a significant contribution to theory
and literature on service quality experience of mobile network users in South Africa. More
interesting is the finding that the new player in the industry, namely Telkom, is ranked second on
service quality after Vodacom. Although MTN is second in terms of market share, the response
from its customers indicate that there are service quality factors that MTN should address to
enhance the service quality experience of customers. BrandsEye (2019) indicated that Vodacom
customers were not happy with its pricing strategies. This, however, did not negatively affect the
customer service quality experience as it came out top compared to all other players in the
industry.
6.2. Contribution to practice on service quality in the mobile network telecommunication
sector
Service quality experience of mobile network customers could be enhanced in South Africa if
players in the sector pay special attention to items with low ratings. A brief highlight of these items
will be discussed in this section. Fifty per cent of the mobile network operators had a positive low
rating on item three of the tangibility scale which focused on staff dressing and neatness. The
appearance of staff plays a critical role as far as service quality is concerned. Poorly dressed staff
members taint the image of the service provider and customers are more likely to develop a
negative attitude towards the firm. Mobile network operators could resolve this challenge by
establishing a dress code for employees and educating them on the value of neatness and
appearance in the services sector. Research in the hospitality sector found that employee dress
code, for example, uniforms aid in making the service more tangible by giving customers the idea
of the service to expect such as limited service, formal or relaxed (Nelson and Bowen, 2000). In
addition, evidence in the banking sector suggest that good tangibles lead to increased customer-
employee interaction resulting in higher levels of customer satisfaction (Thusyanthy and
Senthilnathan, 2011). Given the mentioned positive results in the hospitality and banking sectors,
the mobile network providers may learn and customize such practices to their own benefit.
The study’s findings also revealed that 50% of the mobile network operators received a
low reliability rating on item one of the reliability scale, stating that ‘when my network provider
promises to do something at a certain time, it does so’. The remaining 50% of the mobile network
operators received a low rating on item four of the reliability scale, stating that ‘my network
provider delivers services timely’. This means that 50% of the network providers were not able to
keep some of the promises they made and this negatively affected their reliability ratings. The
findings further reveal that although the other 50% of mobile network operators would keep their
promise, they were failing to deliver the required service on time. Service quality experience of
mobile network users could be enhanced if mobile network operators evaluate customer
complaints and identify the causes of underperformance (Haider et al. 2016). This would enable
them to come up with a strategic plan that focuses on human, technical and financial resources
for improving their reliability issues. This will enable mobile telecommunication network providers
to align what they can deliver (promises) to customer expectations. As a matter of principle,
customers would like to receive the service when it still has value to them not later.
Fifty per cent of the mobile network operators also received a low rating from customers
on item one of the responsiveness scale, stating that ‘my network provider informs clients when
the services will be performed’. This means that 50% of mobile network operators do not always
take the initiative to inform their clients of the actual date when certain service(s) will be performed
and the estimated time it will take to perform the service(s). Some of the services performed by
mobile network operators have seen network connectivity becoming a major problem for several
hours. This is a critical issue as customers would appreciate just a text from the service provider
H. Shava / Eurasian Journal of Business and Management, 9(3), 2021, 217-232
228
informing them if they are likely to experience normal service disruptions. Sadly, some mobile
network operators have a tendency of issuing an apology when the damage is already done, that
is poor network connectivity resulting in loss of communication. Such behavior could be
interpreted to mean that mobile network operators have little appreciation of the value of
communication, and information sharing among customers. Access to information plays a critical
role in the decision-making process for both firms and individuals. Therefore, untimely disruptions
in network connectivity could result in economic loss amounting to millions of Rands for firms and
individuals whose daily operations require a stable network connectivity.
Informing customers in advance would allow them to find other alternatives or schedule
their tasks that would require better network connectivity accordingly. Thus, service quality
experience of customers could be enhanced if mobile network operators commit themselves to
timeous release of information about scheduled maintenance, and other upgrade or downgrade
activities they will perform in future that could disrupt normal network connectivity.
Customers in the mobile network sector further gave 50% of the mobile network operators
a low rating on item one of the empathy scale, stating that ‘my network provider gives you
individual attention’. Customers further gave a low to item three of the empathy scale, stating that
‘my network provider has the client’s best interest at heart’. The low ratings received on the stated
empathy scale items mean that as much as mobile network operators are doing a good job on
these items, some of their customers are of the opinion that they still have to do more to enhance
their service quality experience. In this regard, network mobile operators need to further invest in
training their staff on the importance of service quality. Highly skilled employees may not
completely address all mobile network customer needs and wants but they are capable of
efficiently handling diverse customers and their personal needs. Customers often give credit
where it is due and reward effort with loyalty.
On the last dimension of service quality, that is assurance, 75% of the mobile network
operators received a low rating on item two of the assurance scale, stating that ‘the behavior of
my network provider is one that makes you grow in confidence’. This means that mobile network
operators still have to do more to help customers grow in confidence regarding the services they
claim to render. Customer confidence can be enhanced by being transparent, asking for feedback
and accepting mistakes when they have been made. Informing customers on how the service
they expect from the network mobile provider is rendered will enable customers to learn a great
deal about the entity and begin to appreciate what it stands for. Some entities provide a guided
tour on regular basis to ensure that customers get first-hand experience of what the entity does
and how it carries out such activities.
6.3. Contributions to literature on customer satisfaction in the mobile network
telecommunications sector
A subdivided scale (Part A and B) was used to collect customer responses regarding their
satisfaction experience with mobile network operators. Average satisfaction scores from
customers focusing on Part A of the satisfaction scale indicate that Vodacom customers are on
average 80.95% satisfied with its services, followed by Telkom’s 80%, MTN’s 76.98% and Cell
C’s 71.38%. This finding makes a significant contribution towards literature on customer
satisfaction experience in the mobile network sector. As observed earlier, Vodacom and MTN
command the greatest market share. However, although MTN’s large market share exists, MTN
customers on average are less satisfied than Telkom’s customers. Telkom is considered the
youngest player in the sector when compared to the other three players identified in this study;
yet it is doing significantly better in satisfying its customers than two other players (MTN and Cell
C) who have been in the sector for a significant number of years more than Telkom. Part A of the
customer satisfaction scale was preferred in making this conclusion as it has twice more scale
items than part B of the customer satisfaction scale. South African mobile network operators can
enhance customer satisfaction if they address issues related to quality of reception, signal
strength and cost related to data and normal calls. Mobile network operators in the United
Kingdom largely focused on these attributes and their customers are highly satisfied with the
H. Shava / Eurasian Journal of Business and Management, 9(3), 2021, 217-232
229
service they are receiving from their network operators with an overall average customer
satisfaction rate of 93% (Choose, 2020).
7. Conclusion
This study concludes that service quality and customer satisfaction experience significantly differ
depending on the mobile network operator the customer is using. The study provides evidence
that in South Africa, Vodacom, a leader in market share, delivers superior service quality and
customer satisfaction experience to its customers compared to MTN, Cell C and Telkom. The
results also reveal that although MTN is the second largest in terms of market share, it is
outperformed by Telkom, the youngest player in the industry, in delivering superior service quality
and customer satisfaction experience. Cell C customers rated their service provider poorly when
compared to Vodacom, MTN and Telkom customers as far as service quality and customer
satisfaction experience are concerned. The study further concludes that service quality and
customer satisfaction experience could be enhanced if mobile network operators pay attention to
individual items which were poorly rated by customers across the scales used in the study.
Data was collected from the Eastern Cape Province of South Africa and eight other
provinces were not represented. Generally, the Eastern Cape Province is regarded as lagging
behind in terms of developmental aspects compared to other South African provinces. The
researcher, owing to time and cost limitations, could not determine whether service quality and
customer satisfaction experiences are similar across all the provinces. However, a large sample
was used. In addition, data was collected from various towns and cities of the Eastern Cape
Province, whereby people from all walks of life had an equal chance to participate as long as they
were in the Eastern Cape Province during the field work period. In other words, the study sought
to exploit the advantages of individual mobility. Further, this study is cross-sectional and issues
related to service quality and customer satisfaction experience vary significantly with time. Data
obtained only represented four major players in the industry, and although some other minor
players do exist, the conclusion of the study only reflects the views of customers towards the
major players. Finally, as a result of sectorial differences, the study’s findings may not be
applicable to some sectors of the economy as this study focused on the mobile network
telecommunications sector. Given the above limitations, it is therefore critical for the reader to
approach and interpret the study’s findings with caution as generalizing these findings to other
sector could be misleading.
A longitudinal study could be undertaken to determine whether service quality and
customer satisfaction experiences of mobile network users vary significantly with time depending
on the mobile network operator used. Such a study will provide evidence showing whether
network providers are on the right path towards enhancing service quality and customer
satisfaction or otherwise. More importantly, the study will highlight whether current challenges
being faced by customers will continue to exist given the advancements in technology across the
globe. Qualitatively, research can be undertaken to investigate how such experiences influence
long-term relationships between customers and mobile network operators.
References
Adebiyi, S. O., Shitta, H. A., and Olonade, O. P., 2016. Determinants of customer preference and
satisfaction with Nigerian mobile telecommunication services. BVIMSR’s Journal of
Management Research, 8(1), pp. 1-12.
Agyapong, G. K., 2011. The effect of service quality on customer satisfaction in the utility industry
- A case of Vodafone (Ghana). International Journal of Business and Management, 6(5),
pp. 203-210. https://doi.org/10.5539/ijbm.v6n5p203
Arsal, K., and Yatera, O., 2014. South Africa: LTE rollouts, network investments and undersea
cables to boost competition and revenue. Pyramid Research. [online] Available at:
<http://www.pyramidresearch.com/store/CIRSOUTHAFRICA.html> [Accessed on 14
May 2021].
H. Shava / Eurasian Journal of Business and Management, 9(3), 2021, 217-232
230
Bennett, G., 2017. Building a strong new media brand: the case of TexAgs.com. Sport Marketing
Quarterly, 26(3), pp. 153-167.
BrandsEye, 2019. SA Telco Sentiment Index Consumers threaten to quit networks as half of all
complaints go unanswered and Vodacom bungle implementation of Icasa data
regulations. 29 April. [online] Available at: <https://www.brandseye.com/research/sa-
telco-sentiment-index-highlights-consumer-unhappiness/> [Accessed on 04 May 2021].
BusinessTech, 2019. Mobile market share 2019: Vodacom vs MTN vs Cell C vs Telkom. [online]
Available at: https://businesstech.co.za/news/mobile/319378/mobile-market-share-2019-
vodacom-vs-mtn-vs-cell-c-vs-telkom/ [Accessed on 28 May 2019]
Chair, C., 2016. Top operators for personalised prepaid products. RIA Policy Brief 3. [online]
Available at: <www.researchictafrica.net/polbrf/Research_ICT_Africa_Policy_Briefs/
2016%20Policy%20Brief%203_Top%20operators%20for%20personalised%20prepaid
%20products_South%20Africa.pdf> [Accessed on 04 May 2021].
Choose, 2020. Which mobile network has the best customer service? [online] Available at:
<https://www.choose.co.uk/guide/mobile-network-best-customer-service/> [Accessed on
04 May 2021].
De Villiers, J., 2019. Anger as Vodacom announces a R49 charge to roll over data - but the
company may still back down. [online] Available at:
<https://www.businessinsider.co.za/vodacom-reviews-rollover-data-pricing-r49-
following-social-media-outcry-2019-2> [Accessed on 04 May 2021].
Densmore, A. P. M., Johnson, D., and Feamster, N., 2016. A first look at mobile internet use in
township communities in South Africa. In: Proceedings of the 7th Annual Symposium on
Computing for Development. pp. 1-10.
Gillwald, A., Moyo, M., and Christoph, S., 2012. Understanding what is happening in ICT in South
Africa: A supply-and demand-side analysis of the ICT sector. [online] Available at:
<https://www.africaportal.org/publications/understanding-what-happening-ict-south-
africa-supply-and-demand-side-analysis-ict-sector/> [Accessed on 04 May 2021].
Haider, H., Sadiq, R., and Tesfamariam, S., 2016. Risk-based framework for improving customer
satisfaction through system reliability in small-sized to medium-sized water
utilities. Journal of Management in Engineering, 32(5), 04016008-1— 04016008-11.
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ME.1943-5479.0000435
Izogo, E. E., 2015. Determinants of attitudinal loyalty in Nigerian telecom service sector: does
commitment play a mediating role? Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 23, pp.
107-117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2014.12.010
Jere, M. G., and Mukupa, A., 2018. Customer satisfaction and loyalty drivers in the Zambian
mobile telecommunications industry. Journal of Business and Retail Management
Research (JBRMR), 13(2), pp. 120-128. https://doi.org/10.24052/JBRMR/V13IS02/ART-
11
Khan, S., 2016. 2016: Rise of the living dead - SA’s mobile operators wake up as 2020 draws
closer. [online] Available at:
<https://media.africaportal.org/documents/2016_Policy_Brief_2_South_Africa_mobile_o
perators_wake_up_as_2020_draws_closer.pdf> [Accessed 05 May 2021].
Khumalo, K., 2019. Vodacom failed to impress its customers. Business Report 29 April 2019.
[online] Available at: <https://www.iol.co.za/business-report/companies/vodacom-failed-
to-impress-its-customers-22166242> [Accessed on 04 May 2021].
Ladhari, R., and Leclerc, A., 2013. Building loyalty with online financial services customers: is
there a gender difference? Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 20(6), pp. 560-
569. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2013.07.005
Lai, F., Griffin, M., and Babin, B. J., 2009. How quality, value, image, and satisfaction create
loyalty at a Chinese telecom. Journal of Business Research, 62(10), pp. 980–986.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2008.10.015
Lamb, C. W, Hair, J. F., McDaniel, C., Boshoff, C., Terblance, N., Elliot, R., and Klopper, H. B.,
2015. Marketing. 5th eds.: Cape Town: Oxford University Press.
H. Shava / Eurasian Journal of Business and Management, 9(3), 2021, 217-232
231
Loke, S., Taiwo, A. A., Salim, H. M., and Downe, A. G., 2011. Service quality and customer
satisfaction in a telecommunication service provider. In: International Conference on
Financial Management and Economics, 11(2), pp. 23-29.
Maharaj, M., 2012. Customer perceptions of South African cellular network operators. Indian
Journal of Economics and Business, 11(2), pp. 455-483.
Mazibuko, N. E., 2016. Creating and capturing customer value. In: P. Kotler, and G. Armstrong,
eds. 2016. Principles of marketing: Global and Southern African perspectives. Cape
Town: Pearson. pp. 2-33.
Melody, W. H., 2001. Policy objectives and models of regulation. In: W. H., Melody, ed. 2001.
Telecom reform principles, policies and regulatory practices, Chapter 2. Lyngby: Den
Private Ingeniorfond, Technical University of Denmark. pp. 387- 405.
Morgan, S. and Govender, K., 2017. Exploring customer loyalty in the South African mobile
telecommunications sector. Cogent Business & Management, 4(1), pp. 1, 1273816.
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2016.1273816
Mpwanya, M. F., and Letsoalo, M. E., 2019. Relationship between service quality, customer
satisfaction and behavioural intentions in South Africa’s mobile telecommunication
industry. African Journal of Business and Economic Research, 14(2), pp. 67-89.
https://doi.org/10.31920/1750-4562/2019/14n2a4
Mpwanya, M. F., 2019. An empirical examination of the overall customer satisfaction with the
service delivery of mobile network operators in South Africa. Global Business Review,
pp. 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1177/0972150919859105
Mpwanya, M. F., and Van Heerden, C. H., 2017. A supply-chain cost-reduction framework for the
South African mobile-phone industry. South African Journal of Economic and
Management Sciences, 20(1), pp. 1- 13. https://doi.org/10.4102/sajems.v20i1.1464
Nelson, K., and Bowen, J., 2000. The effect of employee uniforms on employee
satisfaction. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 41(2), pp. 86-95.
https://doi.org/10.1177/001088040004100221
Ngwenya, M., 2017. Analysing service quality using customer expectations and perceptions in
the South African telecommunication industry. In: 2017 IEEE International Conference on
Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management (IEEM) pp. 1094-1097.
https://doi.org/10.1109/IEEM.2017.8290061
Ofori, K. S., Boakye, K., and Narteh, B., 2018. Factors influencing consumer loyalty towards 3G
mobile data service providers: evidence from Ghana. Total Quality Management &
Business Excellence, 29(5), pp. 580-598.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2016.1219654
Oliver, R. L., 1999. Whence consumer loyalty? Journal of Marketing, 63, pp. 33–44.
https://doi.org/10.2307/1252099
Oxford Business Group, 2021. Mobile expansion driving growth for South Africa's telecoms
operators. [online] Available at: <https://oxfordbusinessgroup.com/overview/big-moves-
mobile-expansion-drives-profits-data-grows-popularity> [Accessed on 05 March 2021].
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., and Berry, L. L., 1985. A conceptual model of service quality
and its implication. Journal of Marketing, 49, pp. 41-50.
https://doi.org/10.1177/002224298504900403
ResearchICTafrica, 2017. Internet use barriers and user strategies: South Africa Report. [online]
Available at: <https://blog.mozilla.org/netpolicy/files/2017/07/South-Africa-Research-
ICT-Africa-2017.pdf> [Accessed on 04 May 2021].
ResearchICTafrica. 2018. Dominant operators’ data prices remain static while SA struggles to get
and stay online. [online] Available at: <https://researchictafrica.net/2018/06/14/dominant-
operators-data-prices-remain-static-while-sa-struggles-to-get-and-stay-online/>
[Accessed on 04 May 2021].
Saghier N. E., and Nathan, D., 2013. Service quality dimensions and customers’ satisfaction of
banks in Egypt. Proceedings of 20th International Business Research Conference, 4 -5
April, Dubai, UAE.
H. Shava / Eurasian Journal of Business and Management, 9(3), 2021, 217-232
232
Santouridis, I., and Trivellas, P., 2010. Investigating the impact of service quality and customer
satisfaction on customer loyalty in mobile telephony in Greece. The Total Quality
Management Journal, 22(3), pp. 330-343. https://doi.org/10.1108/17542731011035550
Selelo, G. B., and Lekobane, K. R., 2017. Effects of service quality on customers satisfaction on
Botswana’s mobile telecommunications industry. Archives of Business Research, 5(3),
pp. 212-228. https://doi.org/10.14738/abr.53.2833
Smith, R. A., and Houston, M. J., 1983. Script-based evaluations of satisfaction with services. In:
L. L., Berry, G. L., Shostack, and G. D., Upah, eds. 1983. Emerging perspectives on
services marketing. Chicago: American Marketing Association, Proceedings Series. pp.
59-62.
Srivastava, K., and Sharma, N. K., 2013. Service quality, corporate brand image, and switching
behaviour: The mediating role of customer satisfaction and repurchase intention”
Services Marketing Quarterly, 34(4), 274–291.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15332969.2013.827020
Statista, 2019. Market share of mobile network operators in South Africa from 2011 to 2019.
[online] Available at: <https://www.statista.com/statistics/980115/mobile-market-share-
south-africa/> [Accessed on 04 May 2021].
Thusyanthy, V., and Senthilnathan, S., 2011. Customer satisfaction in terms of physical evidence
and employee interaction. The IUP Journal of Marketing Management, XI (3), pp. 7-24.
https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1939601
Van der Wal, R. W. E., Pampallis, A., and Bond, C., 2002. Service quality in a cellular
telecommunications company: A South African experience. Managing Service Quality:
An International Journal, 12(5), pp. 323-335.
https://doi.org/10.1108/09604520210442119
Venkatesh, S., Venkatesh, A., Hofacker, C., and Naik, P., 2010. Mobile Marketing in the Retailing
Environment: Current Insights and Future Research Avenues. Journal of Interactive
Marketing, 24(2), pp. 111–120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intmar.2010.02.006
Xueming, L., Andrews, M., Fang, Z., and Phang, C. W., 2014. Mobile Targeting. Management
Science, 60(7), pp. 1738–1756. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2013.1836
