www.ccsenet.org/ibr International Business Research Vol. 3,
No. 4; October 2010
72 ISSN 1913-9004 E-ISSN 1913-9012
Service Quality, Customer Satisfaction
and Loyalty: A Test of
Mediation
Rahim Mosahab, PhD Candidate
School of Management, Universiti Sains
Malaysia (USM)
E-mail: rmosahab@yahoo.com
(corresponding author)
Osman Mahamad, Professor
Graduate School of Business, Universiti
Sains Malaysia (USM)
E-mail: osman@usm.my
T. Ramayah, Associate Professor
School of Management, Universiti Sains
Malaysia (USM)
E-mail: ramayah@usm.my
The present research was
supported by a fellowship allowance offered by the School of Management and
Institute of Postgraduate
Studies (IPS) at Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM).
Abstract
relationship between the service quality, satisfaction and
loyalty. In this research, the service quality standard The present research was conducted in a bank in Tehran,
Iran, in 2009/2010. This report is the outcome of afield research, which aimed to determine the quality of
services offered by Sepah Bank, and also to study the
model has been used for evaluation of service quality, Gremler
and Brown (1996) model with some revision was used for evaluating the loyalty, and the instrument offered
by Bitner and Hubbert (1994) was used for evaluation of customer satisfaction. The focus of this research is a
Sepah Bank branch around Fatemi St., Tehran, Iran, and 147 customers of this bank were sampled. The results of this
research show that in all aspects, customers’ expectation, are higher than their perceptions of the Bank’s
operation, and in fact the quality of offered services is low. Besides, this research findings show that the
customer satisfaction plays the role of a mediator in the
effects of service quality on service loyalty. These
findings are further explored.
Keywords: Service
quality, SERVQUAL, Satisfaction, Service loyalty
1. Introduction
The relationship between service behavior and service
quality has proven its role and importance in
during previous decades. Marketing researchers have praised
the advantages of satisfaction and quality, and have management/marketing (Valarie et al., 1996; Heskett &
Sasser, 2010; Hutchinsona et al., 2009). The concepts of service quality and service satisfaction have been highly
considered and used in marketing texts and activities,
mentioned them as indices of an organization competitive
benefit (Ruyter, 1997). On the other hand, service
loyalty is one of the most important structures in service
marketing, due to its final effect on customers’ repeated purchases, and in fact, those loyal customers who purchase
repeatedly are considered as the base of and business
relation of these three concepts.
(Caruana, 2002). Although these concepts have been used so
many times in the marketing literature, but the relations between these three concepts still remain
ambiguous. Therefore, this research intends to study the
1.1 SERVICE QUALITY
service marketing intellectuals and researchers have offered
several metaphors of this issue. For example, Berry The fact that the perceived quality of the product is
becoming the most important competition factor in business world has been the reason of naming the present business era
as “Quality Era” (Peeler, 1996). Consequently,
(cited in Kandampully, 1998, p 423) calls it the most
powerful competition weapon and Clow (1993) calls it the organization’s life-giving blood.
Quality is a multi-dimensional phenomenon. Thus, reaching
the service quality without distinguishing the
Lehtinen and Lehtinen (cited in Harrison, 2000) have
referred to dimensions of physical quality, interactive
important aspects of quality is impossible. In his
discussion of service quality, Gronroos (2000) refers to three dimensions of output technical quality, service performance
quality, and organization’s mental picture. Also,
www.ccsenet.org/ibr International Business Research Vol. 3,
No. 4; October 2010
Published by Canadian Center of Science and Education
73
this basis, Zeithaml et al. (1996) have referred to ten
dimensions of service quality in their primary researches.
quality, and organizational quality as three dimensions of
service quality. Although these attempts have had a major role in division of service quality into process
quality and output quality, but they lack enough details. On
But, in their further researches, they found a strong
correlation among those dimensions. Thus, they combined these dimensions and applied the fivefold dimension of
Reliability, Responsiveness, Assurance, Empathy and Tangibles as a basis for making a tool for testing the
service quality, known as SERVQUAL. In their researches, they emphasize that SERVQUAL is a lasting and reliable scale
of service quality (Parasuraman et al., 1994). They also said that this tool is applicable in an extensive
spectrum of service domains such as financial institutions, libraries, hotels, medical centers and…, although
some of its components should be rephrased, or more components should be added to it. Many researchers have
tried to use this tool in different service domains
(see table 1).
reliable methods of measurement, assessment, and improvement
(Spohrer & Maglio, 2008). Service quality is Services are increasingly becoming a larger portion of many
organizations’ regionally, nationally, and globally and are considered as a tool for revenue streams. Today’s
knowledge intensive services businesses require
determined by calculating the difference between two scores
where better service quality results in a smaller gap (Landrum, et al., 2008). Johnston, et al. (1997) did
comprehensive empirical experiments on service quality dimensions offered by Parasuraman, et al. (1985 & 1988)
in ten service organizations in England. At first, they presented a list of 12 factors, and then with more
researches done, they offered a list of 18 factors. In addition, many researchers have presented different models for testing
the quality of banking services, by inspiring from
SERVQUAL model.
Avkiran (1994) has introduced a model consisting of four
dimensions (personnel’s contact, reliability,
consisting of Complaint, Assurance, Reliability, Tangibles,
Empathy, and Responsiveness which includes 34 communication, and access to services), and seventeen
components. Also, considering the difference between Islamic banking and Usury banking in nature, Othman &
Own (2001) have offered a model called CARTER,
components.
1.2 CUSTOMER SATISFACTION
Customer satisfaction is a key factor in formation of
customer’s desires for future purchase (Mittal & Kamakura, 2001). Furthermore, the satisfied customers will probably
talk to others about their good experiences. This fact,
especially in the Middle Eastern cultures, where the social
life has been shaped in a way that social
communication with other people enhances the society, is
more important (Jamal & Naser, 2002). Although
after experience while quality is not the same. On the other
hand, in satisfaction literature, expectations for goods satisfaction has been defined as the difference between
expectation and performance, but there are differences between quality and satisfaction. For example, Parasuraman
et al. (1991) say that satisfaction is a decision made
is “would”, while in service quality literature,
expectations for goods is “should”.
on the basis of the knowledge about service provider, while
satisfaction is an inner view, resulted from
Cadotte & Turgeon (1988) have introduced another group
of factors known as neutral factors. Besides, Liljander & Strandvik (1993) say that experience is not needed for
evaluating service quality, and service can be evaluated
customer’s own experience from the service. Finally, several
researches have been done on the relation between service quality and satisfaction: findings of some of these
researches show that satisfaction results in service quality (Parasuraman et al., 1988). Also, the research
conducted by Sureshchandar et al. (2002) shows that, there is a two-way relation between satisfaction and service
quality.
1.3 SERVICE LOYALTY
Many service organizations have developed customer loyalty
programs as a part of relations development
activities. Customer loyalty is a complicated concept.
Oxford Dictionary defines loyalty as a state of true to
allegiance. But the mere repeated purchase by customers has
been mixed with the above mentioned definition of loyalty. In service domain, loyalty has been defined in an
extensive form as “observed behaviors” (Bloemer et al.,
1999). Caruana (2002) argues that behavior is a full
expression of loyalty to the brand and not just thoughts.
service may be resulted from different situation factors,
such as non-availability or absence of a provider.
However, behavior standards (such as repeated purchase) have
been criticized, due to the lack of a conceptual basis of a dynamic process (Caruana, 2002). For example, the
low frequency of repeated purchase of a special
According to this point of view, loyal behavior cannot offer
a comprehensive conception of fundamental causes of loyalty. Additionally, repetition may be due to different
restrictions resulted from the market. Consequently,
www.ccsenet.org/ibr International Business Research Vol. 3,
No. 4; October 2010
the loyalty of this type of customers mainly differs from
the loyalty of those customers who seriously support a product, and do have psychological bond with a product and a
company. Therefore, customer’s loyalty was
74 ISSN 1913-9004 E-ISSN 1913-9012
loyalty, called cognitive approach, was introduced. The
operational definition of this approach often refers to the considered as an attitudinal structure. For example, this
issue appears in the tendency to advise the service offer to other customers. Finally, in addition to behavioral and
attitudinal approaches, another approach to customer’s
that a person chooses among products and services.
first product or service which comes to the mind of a
person, while making decision for purchase. Meanwhile, in their definition of this approach, Ostrowski et al. (1993)
and Bloemer (1999) refer to the first product or service
1.4 REVIEW OF SOME ACCOMPLISHED STUDIES
Despite the importance of service quality, so far a few
researches have been done in this field in Iran, but
the article, this number will be 4000 articles. These
numbers clearly show the importance of service quality, and numerous researches have been accomplished outside Iran. At
least 293 important articles have been written from 1976 to 1995 on service quality. Meanwhile, if we
consider articles in which service quality forms a part of
the researchers’ attentions to this topic (Philip &
Hazlett, 1997).
(1) Bloemer, et al. (1998) have presented a model to show
how the mental picture, service quality, and customer satisfaction influence customer loyalty. Findings of this
research show that the mental picture indirectly and
relatively important stimulants affecting the loyalty to
bank services.
through service quality, influences loyalty. On the other
hand, service quality influences loyalty both directly and indirectly (through satisfaction). Besides, this research
showed that the reliability and position in the market are
(2) On the relationship between customer satisfaction,
service quality and service loyalty in Malta’s banks,
Caruana (2002) concluded that customer satisfaction plays a
mediator role in the effect of service quality on
the variance. service loyalty. In fact, service quality affects service
loyalty through customer satisfaction. In addition, results of this research show that service quality is an important
gateway to customer satisfaction, and explains 53% of
bank’s reputation. In addition, on the basis of this
research’s findings, the bank’s reputation plays an important
(3) Yongyui (2003) has presented a model for the
relationship between service quality and bank’s reputation. According to the findings of this research, the fivefold
dimensions of service quality have direct effect on the
role in determination of purchase, repeated purchase, and
customer loyalty. This issue has much more
importance in banking industry, because service quality
cannot be accurately evaluated before purchasing.
(4) On customers’ abandonment behavior in America’s banks,
Chakravarty (2003) found that there is a
meaningful negative relation among service quality
dimensions, responsiveness, empathy, and reliability, with customer’s tendency to abandon the bank. This study in
India’s banks show that the concept of service quality in
developing countries is a multi-dimensional structure, and
in fact the results clearly show that SERVQUAL
model provides more evaluating information in relation with
service quality gaps, than SERVPERF scale.
1.5 The conceptual model of the research
The following conceptual model has been used in this
article.
Research Conceptual model
From the above mentioned model the following main hypothesis
are developed:
H1- Perceived service quality is positively associated with
customer satisfaction.
H2- Perceived service quality is positively associated with
customer loyalty.
H3- Customer satisfaction is positively associated with
customer loyalty.
H4- Customer satisfaction mediates the relationship between
perceived service quality and customer loyalty.
1.6 Research questions
This article attends to find answers to the following
questions:
(1) Is there any meaningful difference between customers’
expectations and their perception about Sepah Bank
performance?
(2) What is the relation between three concepts of service
quality, customer satisfaction and loyalty?
Perceived Services Quality
Reliability
Responsiveness
Assurance
Empathy
Tangibles
Customer
Satisfaction
Customer
Loyalty
www.ccsenet.org/ibr International Business Research Vol. 3,
No. 4; October 2010
Published by Canadian Center of Science and Education
75
(3) What is the relation between five dimensions of service
quality, satisfaction and loyalty?
(4) What is the relation between resulted and processed
dimensions of satisfaction and loyalty?
2. Research Methodology
The objective of this research is to clarify the
relationship between three variables of service quality, customer
satisfaction, and customer loyalty and to describe the
understudy conditions and phenomena, in order to better
understanding of present conditions, and helping the
decision making process. This research can be categorized
as descriptive research based on the method of obtaining the
considered data. Since these data are made for
studying the distribution of statistical population
characteristics through sampling of population, this research is
a survey done on the basis of cross sectional method.
2.1 Information gathering tool
third part for evaluation of expectations, fourth part for
evaluating Bank Sepah’s performance from customers
Based on the literature review and the research design, a
questionnaire was prepared consisting of five sections, which the first part was on specifications of the
respondent, second part on the fivefold dimensions preference,
view, and finally the fifth part including questions related
to customers loyalty and satisfaction. In this research,
SERVQUAL has been used for designing questions related to
service quality, Gremler and Brown’s tool (1996)
for evaluating the loyalty, and for customer satisfaction
evaluation, a tool offered by Bitner and Hubbert (1994)
has been used. The above mentioned tools have been used in
many researches conducted on service quality, thus
these tools can be considered highly reliable.
To test the evaluating tool reliability, the designed
questionnaire was at first distributed between about 26
customers of the bank, and was analyzed after being
collected. The results of the primary sample show that
Cronbach alpha (α) index is 0.94, indicating high
reliability.
2.2 Statistical population and sample
The statistical population of this research is customers of
a Sepah Bank branch in Tehran, Iran. Since the
statistical population was unlimited, therefore the
following formula was used to get the size of the sample:
Z2 α /2 δ2
n= ---------------
E ²
The variance of the obtained answers from the primary sample
was 880.87, and by putting it in the above
mentioned formula, the reliability level (α) was 95 percent, and estimate accuracy
(E) was 5, and the sample size
was 136. But since there was a probability that some of
questionnaire would not be returned, 250 questionnaires
were distributed, which finally 147 questionnaires were
collected and analyzed.
3. Data Analysis
At first, descriptive statistics (results have been shown in
table 2) was used to study the characteristics of
statistical sample, and perceptive statistics (pair student
T test, Spearman correlation index, Beta (ß) meaningful
level test in linear regression and…) was used for analyzing
the questionnaires.
Question 1: Is
there any meaningful difference between customer’s expectations and their
perception about
Sepah Bank performance in each of the fivefold dimension,
and in total?
As shown in table 2, the respondents’ expectations in all
fivefold dimensions, and in total, is more than Bank’s
performance in one dimension. Since these means are merely
related to the mentioned sample, we have done the
T test to study the meaningful explanation of their
difference. The results of T test have been brought about in
pair, in table 3. Considering the fact that the
meaningfulness level in all dimensions is less than 0.05 of error
level (and even 0.01), zero premises (there is no meaningful
difference between expectation and performance)
are failed. In other words, there is a meaningful difference
between customer’s expectation and the Bank’s
performance in each of dimensions separately and totally,
and customer’s expectation in all cases is more than
Bank’s performance. Thus, it can be said that the service
quality is low, totally, and each of the discussed
dimensions.
Question 2: What
is the relation between three concepts of service quality, customer’s
satisfaction and loyalty?
To do this, following three regression models should be
tested:
(1) Mediator variable regression (customer satisfaction) on
independent variable (service quality): in this test,
satisfaction will be considered as dependent variable, and
service quality as independent variable.
(2) Dependent variable regression (loyalty) on independent
variable (service quality): In this test, loyalty will be
considered as dependent variable, and service quality as in
dependent variable.
www.ccsenet.org/ibr International Business Research Vol. 3,
No. 4; October 2010
76 ISSN 1913-9004 E-ISSN 1913-9012
(3) Dependent variable regression (service loyalty) on
independent variable (service quality), and mediator
variable (customer satisfaction): Table 4 shows that in this
test, loyalty is considered as dependent variable, and
service quality and satisfaction as independent variable.
As shown in table 4, for the first model, R² = 0.43 was
obtained, and it can be said that 43 percent of the
dependent variable changes is explained by the model. In the
second model (table 9), R² = 0.458 was obtained,
thus almost 45 percent of the dependent variable changes is
shown by the model. As shown, R² = 0.80 was
obtained in the third model, and it can be considered that
80 percent of the dependent variable changes is
explained by the model, in other words, a very high
percentage of dependent variable changes are identified by
the mentioned model. As a result, customer satisfaction
partially mediates the relationship between service
quality and customer loyalty.
Now, the question is that is there any linear relation
between the variable pair understudy in the model? To
answer this question, single factor variance analysis test
(ANOVA) is used. Data mentioned in table 4 shows:
First model: Considering
the test statistic F = 112.67 and also zero meaningfulness level of the test,
it can be
concluded that there is a meaningful linear relation between
the two variables.
Second model: The
test statistic, F = 122.41 and test meaningfulness level is zero. Therefore,
since the
meaningfulness level is less than error level, zero
assumption is denied, and the relation between the two
variables is meaningful.
Third model: The
test statistic F = 292.56 and test meaningfulness level is zero. This means
that the zero
assumption in 0.05 level is denied, in other words, there is
a meaningful linear relation between dependent
variable (Y) and at least one of the independent variables.
Therefore, it can be said that although both variables have
a meaningful linear relation with the loyalty variable,
but the satisfaction variable has a stronger relation with
loyalty. Considering the positive sign of Beta index, this
relation is in one direction, and loyalty is increased
considerably with the increase of satisfaction.
In general, considering the applied models, the third model
is better, since the determination index in this model
is a higher figure compared with other models. Although the
determination index in the second model is close to
the third one, but compared with the third model, it is less
appropriate, since one of the independent variables has
been ignored in this model.
Question 3: What
is the relation between five dimensions of service quality, satisfaction and
loyalty?
This part will study the relation of each one of service
quality dimensions with satisfaction and loyalty. To study
the amount of the relation between each one f service
quality dimensions with satisfaction and loyalty, Pearson
correlation index is used. In tables 5 and 6, the
correlation indices of satisfaction and loyalty have been
calculated with five dimensions. Considering the first
column in both tables, it can be said that all variables have
a meaningful linear relation with satisfaction variable, as
well as loyalty (meaningfulness level in all cases is less
than the error level), and the highest relation is between
empathy variable with satisfaction and loyalty. The
positive sign of correlation indices shows direct relation
of variables, so that in all five dimensions, with the
increase of service quality, satisfaction and loyalty will
be increased.
Question 4: What
is the relation between resulted and processed dimensions, satisfaction and
loyalty?
The fivefold dimensions of service quality can be considered
from another point of view. In fact, they can be
divided into two more general categories of resulted and
processed. The resulted dimension includes reliability
dimension, and the processed dimension includes other
dimensions (tangibles, responsiveness, assurance, and
empathy). Now, the question to be answered is which
dimension is more important in attracting customer’s
satisfaction and loyalty? For his reason, Pearson
correlation index is used.
Table 7 and 8 show the correlation indices of satisfaction
and loyalty variables with resulted and processed
dimensions. This tables show that the two variables have a
positive meaningful linear relation with satisfaction
and loyalty variables, so that the higher service quality in
each of the dimensions, the more satisfaction and
loyalty.
But in both cases, the processed dimensions have more
correlation with satisfaction and loyalty. Therefore,
although the result of service received by customers may not
be appropriate, but it does not mean that customers
consider service quality totally weak. On the other hand,
high correlation between the processed dimension and
satisfaction and loyalty shows that service challenges have played
a more important role in customer’s
assessment from service quality. Thus, the process of
service offer is a good opportunity for increasing the
service quality in the view of customers.
www.ccsenet.org/ibr International Business Research Vol. 3,
No. 4; October 2010
Published by Canadian Center of Science and Education
77
4. Conclusion
The results of this research show that in all fivefold
dimensions of service quality and also in total, customers’
expectations are beyond their perceptions of the bank
performance. In fact, findings of this research show that
although in all fivefold dimensions of service quality Sepah
Bank’s performance has been higher than average
limit, but its service quality does not satisfy customers’
expectations.
Also, it was expected that service quality would be one of
the determinants of satisfaction and loyalty. In fact,
nearly 43 percent of customer’s satisfaction change is
explained by service quality. On the other hand, service
quality has a direct relation with loyalty, and nearly 45
percent of loyalty changes can be explained by service
quality changes. Another point is that if the satisfaction
variable enters the model, the resulted determination
index will be higher in figure than other cases (0.803).
This figure means that nearly 80 percent of loyalty
changes can be explained by satisfaction and service
quality, although satisfaction plays a more important role in
this relation.
In addition, findings of this research show that there is a
positive and meaningful relation among all fivefold
dimensions of service quality with satisfaction and loyalty,
which in both cases assurance and tangibles have the
most and the least relation with satisfaction and loyalty.
In other words, it sees that tangibles can be considered
as health factors, and assurance as motivational factor. In
addition, the fivefold dimensions of service quality can
be observed from another point of view. In fact, these
dimensions can be divided into two more general
dimensions of resulted and processed. The resulted dimension
includes reliability dimension, and the processed
dimension includes other dimensions (tangibles,
responsiveness, assurance, and empathy). Findings of this part
too, show that both resulted and processed dimensions have a
positive and meaningful relation with satisfaction
and loyalty. But the important point is that there is
significant relation between the processed dimensions and
satisfaction and loyalty.
This point is important because although the final output
may not satisfy customer’s satisfaction, but it does not
necessarily mean customer’s dissatisfaction. In fact,
service encounter plays an important role in customer’s
satisfaction and loyalty. Considering the above mentioned
findings, the Bank’s manager should try to gradually
reduce the gaps in the first step, and should attempt to
make this gap positive, and to surpass customers’
expectations, in the next step.
5. Limitation
This research was conducted in one branch of Sepah Bank,
thus may not be generalizable to other branches.
Therefore, more branches need to be investigated. It is also
suggested that other related factors of service quality
such as internal marketing, HR, organizational behavior and
leadership to be included in the future researches.
References
Avkiran, N, K. (1994). Developing an instrument to measure
customer service quality in branch banking.
International Journal of Bank Marketing. 12 (6), 10-18.
Bitner, M. J. & Hubbert, A. R. (1994). Encounter
satisfaction versus overall satisfaction versus quality: the
customer's voice. service quality: new directions in theory
and practice, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage(In Rust,
R.T.,
& Oliver, R.L. (Eds.), 72-94.
Bloemer, J. (1998). investigating derivers of bank loyalty:
the complex relationship between image, service
quality and satisfaction. International
Journal of Bank Marketing, 16(7),
276-286.
Bloemer, J. (1999). Linking perceived service quality and
service loyalty: a multi-dimensional perspective.
European Journal of Marketing, 33(11, 12), 1082-1106.
Cadotte, E., & Turgeon, N. (1988). Key Factors in Guest
Satisfaction, Cornell Hotel and Restaurant
Administration Quarterly, 28, 44-51
Caruana, A. (2002). Service Loyalty: The Effects of Service
Quality and the Mediating role of Customer
Satisfaction. European
Journal of Marketing, 36(7), 811-828.
Chakravarty, S. (2003). Relationships and individual’s bank
switching behavior. Journal of Economic
Psychology, 1-21.
Clow, K, E. (1993). Building a competitive advantage for
service firms. International Journal of Service
Marketing, 7(1),
22-32.
Gremler, D. D. & Brown S.W.(1996). Service Loyalty: Its
Nature, Importance, and Implications: in Advancing
Service Quality: A Global Perspective. International Service Quality Association, 171-180.
www.ccsenet.org/ibr International Business Research Vol. 3,
No. 4; October 2010
78 ISSN 1913-9004 E-ISSN 1913-9012
Gronroos, C. (2000). Service management and marketing. John
Wiley & sons Ltd.
Heskett, J. L., & Sasser, W. E. (2010). The Service
Profit Chain: From Satisfaction to Ownership, Handbook of
Service Science, Publisher
Springer
Hutchinsona, J., Laib, F., & Wang, Y. (2009).
Understanding the relationships of quality, value, equity,
satisfaction, and behavioral intentions among golf
travelers. International Journal of Tourism
Management,
30(2), 298-308
Jamal, A., & Naser, K. (2002). Customer satisfaction and
retail banking: an Assessment of Some of the Key
Antecedents of Customer Satisfaction in Retail Banking. International Journal o Bank Marketing, 20(4),
146-160.
Johneston, R. (1997). Identify the critical determinants of
service quality in retail banking: Importance and
Effect. International
Journal of Bank Marketing, 15(4),
111-116.
Kandampully, J. (1998). Service Quality to service loyalty:
a relationship which goes beyond customer services.
Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 9(6), 431-443.
Landrum, H., Prybutok, V. R. Kappelman, L. A., & Zhang,
X. (2008). SERVCESS: A parsimonious instrument
to measure service quality and information system success. The Quality Management Journal, 15(3), 17-25.
Liljander, V., & Strandvik, T. (1993). Estimating Zones
of Tolerance in Perceived Service Quality and Perceived
Service Value, International
Journal of Service Industry Management,
4(2), 6-28.
Mittal, V., & Kamakura, W.A. (2001). Satisfaction,
Repurchase Intent, and Repurchase Behavior: Investigating
the Moderating Effect of Customer Characteristics, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 38(1), 131-142.
Othman A.Q., & Owen L. (2001). Adopting and measuring
customer service quality (SQ) in Islamic Banks: A
Case Study in Kuwait Finance House. International Journal of Financial Services, 3(1), 1-26.
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. & Berry, L (1988).
SERVQUAL: A multiple item scale for measuring customer
perceptions of service quality. Journal of Retailing, 64(1), 12-40.
Parasuraman, A., Berry, L.L & Zeithaml, V (1985). A
conceptual model of service quality and the implications
for future research. Journal
of Marketing Management, 49, 41-51.
Parasuraman, A. & Berry, L. L. (1991). Marketing for
Services: Competing through Quality. The
Free Press,
New York, NY.
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V.A. & Berry, L.L. (1994).
Alternative scales for measuring service quality: a
comparative assessment based on psychometric and diagnostic
criteria. Journal of Retailing, 70(3), 201-230.
Peeler, G. H. (1996). Selling in the quality era. Blackwell Business, USA.
Philip, G. & Hazlett, S. (1997). The Measurement of
service quality: a new p-c-p attributes model.
International Journal
of Quality and Reliability Management, 14(3),
260-286.
Ruyter, K. (1997). Measuring service quality and service
satisfaction: an empirical test of an integrative model.
Journal of Economic Psychology, 18, 387-406.
Spohrer, J. & Maglio, P. (2008). The emergence of
service science: Toward systematic service innovations to
accelerate co-creation of value. Production and Operations Management, 17(3), 238-246.
Stewart, R. (1999). Measuring service quality: current
thinking and future requirements. Marketing
Intelligence
& Planning, 17(1),
21-32.
Valarie, Zeithaml, Berry & Parasuraman (1996) The
Behavioral Consequences of Service Quality, The
Journal
of Marketing, 60(2),
31-46
Yonggui, W. (2003). The Antecedents of service quality and
product quality and their influences on bank
reputation: evidence from the banking industry in China. Managing Service quality, 13(1), 72-83.
Zeithaml, V. A., Berry, L.L. & Parasuraman, A. (1996).
The behavioural consequences of service quality.
Journal of Marketing Management, 60(No. April), 31-46.
www.ccsenet.org/ibr International Business Research Vol. 3,
No. 4; October 2010
Published by Canadian Center of Science and Education
79
sumber: https://teorionline.wordpress.com/2011/10/05/service-quality-customer-satisfaction-and-loyalty-a-test-of-mediation/#more-1668
0 komentar:
Posting Komentar