objectives ,findings and limitations of the research conducted by parasuraman et al on the servqual model

2. NAMES INDEX
KUDZIE TORNAM NOBLE 213021978
SHEILAMITE HUGO KRIEGER 213021951
BENJAMIN SIAW LEYEG 213021986
LINDA ENYONAM AGBAGBA 213021927
ERIC TETTEH DJORBUAH 213021943
OSAE MICHEAL OKYERE 212013017
HORNU FRANCIS SELORM 213021994
OWULAKU OWEN 213022001

3. Unlike goods quality, which can be measured objectively by such
indicators as durability and number of defects (Crosby 1979;
Garvin 1983), Service quality is an abstract and elusive construct
because of the three major features unique to services:
intangibility, heterogeneity and inseparability. The major purpose
of this article is in two folds:
○ To describe the development of a multiple-item scale for measuring
service quality (SERVQUAL)
○ To discuss the scale’s properties and potential applications
 This article is however divided into five sections, the first
section restricts the domain of the service-quality construct
and describes the generation of scale items (steps 1, 2, 3).
The second section presents the data-collection and scale –
purification procedures (steps 4 through to 9), while the third
section provides an evaluation of the scale’s reliability and
factor structure (step 10). The next section deals with
assessment of the scale’s validity (step 11). The final section
discusses potential applications of the scale.

4.  WHAT IS THE MAIN THEME FOR THE
CASE STUDY?
 STATE THE MAIN OBJECTIVE OF THE
STUDY?
 WHICH METHODOLOGY WAS USED
FOR STUDY?
 LIST THE MAJOR FINDINGS IN THE
STUDY?
 IDENTIFY ANY LIMITATION OF THE
STUDY?

5. SOLUTIONS
1. The main theme for the case is a MULTIPLE ITEM SCALE
FOR MEASURING CONSUMER PERCEPTION OF SERVICE
QUALITY.
2. There are two main objectives in this case.
a) To describe the development of a multiple item scale for measuring
services quality called servqual.
b) To discuss the scale’s properties and the potential applications.
3. The methodology used for the study is the Qualitative and
Quantitative methods. For the qualitative, The researchers
conducted a total of twelve focus group interviews with current
or recent consumers of four different services, they are retail
banking, credit card, securities brokerage, and product repair
and maintenance. The discussions centered on issues such as
the meaning of quality in the context of the service in questions,
the characteristics the service and its provider should possess
in order to project a high-quality image, and the criteria
customers use in evaluating service quality.

6. For the quantitative method which involves gathering statistical
data on various measurable aspect of consumer behavior,
surveys and transactional analysis.

7. SOLUTIONS CONTINUED
 Major findings in the case are
 Dimensions of service quality: tangibles, reliability,
responsiveness, understanding/knowing the customer and
access ,communication, credibility, security, competence,
courtesy, .
 SERVQUAL can be used to assess a given firm’s quality along
each of the five service dimensions namely tangibility,
reliability, responsiveness, courtesy and credibility. It can also
provide an overall measure of service quality in the form of an
average score across all five dimensions.
 SERVQUAL is most valuable when it is used periodically to
track service quality trends and when it is used in conjunction
with other forms of service quality measurement.
 SERVQUAL can help a wide range of service and retailing
organizations in assessing consumer expectations about and
perceptions of the service quality.
 SERVQUAL can also help in pinpointing areas requiring
managerial attention and action to improve service quality.

8. SOULTIONS CONTINUED
 Some limitations in the case is:
 There is little evidence that customers assess service quality in terms of Perception
/ Expectation gaps.
 SERVQUAL focuses on the process of service delivery, not the outcomes of the
service encounter.
 the model is suitable only for service provision businesses therefore it doesn’t apply
appropriate to businesses which provide tangible goods
 looking at the implementation of the model to the restaurant industry it could be
argued that customer expectations and perceptions can be compared only after the
customer finishes their meal. Potential issues might occur as expectations are
formed before the meal is served therefore the measurement of service quality in
terms of this situation does not appear reliable
 Customer perceptions can change toward the same service delivery in the light of
previous experiences because the new expectations can be created for the same
service, therefore the validity of the measurement can decrease over time.
 The model does not also recognise the technical aspect of service as an important
part of process . The model only aims to measure functional aspect of service
process. This affects the measurement of whole quality aspects of service process.

10. THE END